CSF for ERP Acquisition
Content
Journal of Enterprise Information Management
So you're thinking of buying an ERP? Ten critical factors for successful acquisitions
Jacques Verville Christine Bernadas Alannah Halingten
Article information:
Downloaded by University College Cork At 06:17 27 October 2015 (PT)
To cite this document:
Jacques Verville Christine Bernadas Alannah Halingten, (2005),"So you're thinking of buying an ERP? Ten
critical factors for successful acquisitions", Journal of Enterprise Information Management, Vol. 18 Iss 6 pp.
665 - 677
Permanent link to this document:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17410390510628373
Downloaded on: 27 October 2015, At: 06:17 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 39 other documents.
To copy this document: [email protected]
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 2725 times since 2006*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
Carl Marnewick, Lessing Labuschagne, (2005),"A conceptual model for enterprise resource planning
(ERP)", Information Management & Computer Security, Vol. 13 Iss 2 pp. 144-155 http://
dx.doi.org/10.1108/09685220510589325
David Sammon, Frederic Adam, (2005),"Towards a model of organisational prerequisites for enterprisewide systems integration: Examining ERP and data warehousing", Journal of Enterprise Information
Management, Vol. 18 Iss 4 pp. 458-470 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17410390510609608
Sherry Finney, Martin Corbett, (2007),"ERP implementation: a compilation and analysis of critical
success factors", Business Process Management Journal, Vol. 13 Iss 3 pp. 329-347 http://
dx.doi.org/10.1108/14637150710752272
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:409798 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for
Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines
are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as
providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee
on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive
preservation.
*Related content and download information correct at time of download.
The Emerald Research Register for this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/researchregister
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/1741-0398.htm
So you’re thinking of buying an
ERP? Ten critical factors for
successful acquisitions
Jacques Verville and Christine Bernadas
Critical factors
for successful
acquisitions
665
Department of Management Information Systems & Decision Science,
Texas A&M International University, Laredo, Texas, USA, and
Alannah Halingten
Downloaded by University College Cork At 06:17 27 October 2015 (PT)
Halingten-Verville & Associates, Laredo, Texas, USA
Abstract
Purpose – This paper aims to present a discussion of the critical success factors (CSF) that affect the
acquisition process for enterprise resource planning (ERP) software.
Design/methodology/approach – The research strategy was a multiple-case design with three
organizations that had recently completed the acquisition of an ERP solution. The rationale for the
multiple-case design was that, as a research strategy, the focus could be directed to understanding the
dynamics and complexities present within each case, these being critical success factors of the ERP
software acquisition process within the organization.
Findings – This study identified ten factors critical to the successful outcome of acquiring an ERP
solution. Their omission would have resulted in a less than optimal outcome for the organization. For
each of the three cases, the elements that stand out the most are as follows: clear and unambiguous
authority, a structured, rigorous and user-driven process, its planning, the establishment of criteria,
and the sense of partnership that the team works to establish not only with various user commitments,
but also with the potential vendor.
Originality/value – It is important to note that no one CSF alone is going to make an ERP
acquisition successful. It is rather the combination of several critical factors that will result in its
successful outcome.
Keywords Manufacturing resource planning, Computer software, Critical success factors
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
Enterprise resource planning (ERP) software is a suite of application modules that can
link back-office operations to front-office operations as well as internal and external
supply chains. It conjoins functional areas and business processes in an integrated
environment that provides a broad scope of applicability for organizations (Verville
and Halingten, 2001; PricewaterhouseCoopers, 1998). While considered a viable
alternative to in-house development (Verville, 2000; Eckhouse, 1999; McNurlin and
Sprague, 1998), the acquisition of ERP software is not without its challenges. It is
considered a high-expenditure activity that consumes a significant portion of an
organization’s capital budget. It is also an activity that is fraught with a high level of
risk and uncertainty. Why? Because, first of all, if a wrong purchase is made, it can
adversely affect the organization as a whole, in several different areas and on several
different levels, even to the point of jeopardizing the very existence of the organization.
This highlights the obvious need for making the right choice of software. It also brings
Journal of Enterprise Information
Management
Vol. 18 No. 6, 2005
pp. 665-677
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
1741-0398
DOI 10.1108/17410390510628373
JEIM
18,6
Downloaded by University College Cork At 06:17 27 October 2015 (PT)
666
to light the need for finding the best means for acquiring this type of software so that
the right choice can be made (Verville and Halingten, 2001; Hill, 1999).
In light of these concerns, a research project was undertaken to determine the best
way to acquire ERP software. However, with little research found on the topic of ERP
acquisitions, it first became necessary to find out what indeed the process is that
organizations go through to buy ERP software (Esteves and Pastor, 2001).
The focus of this paper, then, is on the critical success factors of the acquisition
process for ERP software. The paper will begin with a literature review and continue
with the research methodology used for the study. Finally, the critical success factors
expressed by the practitioners will be presented.
Literature review
A review of the literature in the field of MIS shows that research conducted in the area
of ERPs has concentrated on implementation and post-implementation issues (Esteves
and Pastor, 2001; Verville, 2000). The type of problems and issues that arise from the
implementation of ERP systems range from specific issues and problems that can come
up during the installation of an ERP, to behavioral, procedural, political, and
organizational changes, etc., that manifest subsequent to the installation. For instance,
Gibson et al. (1999) argue that ERP implementation requires a different approach
which focuses on business process design, software configuration and project
management by de-emphasizing the technical side of implementation. Another
research area is that of organizational change. In this area, Boudreau and Robey (1999)
present a framework to guide research on ERP-related organizational transition (i.e.
organizational change as a process). Another study by Koh et al. (2000) uses a
framework, based on a process theory approach, to understand and explain the ERP
implementation experiences of organizations. Another subject of research within the
area of organizational change is the roles of individuals within organizations. In this
vein, Davenport (1998) states that ERP implementation process roles, responsibilities
and skill sets change substantially from those associated with a traditional
implementation. Other interesting topics for research include user buy-in,
commitment (management, team, organization, etc.), ERP adoption, leadership,
organizational culture, stakeholders, organizational learning, organizational
effectiveness, business process modeling, ERP development issues, and
communications, to name but a few (Chwen et al., 2004; Verville and Halingten,
2003a, b; Chung and Snyder, 2000; Everdingen et al., 2000; Kumar and Hillegersberg,
2000; Lee and Lee, 2000; Markus et al., 2000; Stafyla and Stefanou, 2000; Soh et al., 2000;
Glover et al., 1999; Miranda, 1999; Riper and Durham, 1999; Sutcliffe, 1999; Appleton,
1997; Best, 1997).
As for the literature that combines critical success factors and ERP software, all the
articles (Al-Mashari et al., 2003; Akkermans and Van Helden, 2002; Hong and Kim,
2002; Nah et al., 2001; Soliman et al., 2001; Scott and Vessey, 2000; Bingi et al., 1999;
Holland and Light, 1999) explicitly focus on the critical success factors for the
implementation process.
The issue of the acquisition process for ERP software is for the most part being
ignored. This issue is important, however, because as the stage preceding the
implementation process, it presents the opportunity for both researchers and
Downloaded by University College Cork At 06:17 27 October 2015 (PT)
practitioners to examine all of the dimensions and implications (benefits, risks,
challenges, costs, etc.) of buying and implementing ERP software prior to the
commitment of formidable amounts of money, time and resources. Hence, a clearer
understanding of the critical factors could amount to substantial savings in terms of
economics (actual cost), time, and improved administrative procedures, and could
lessen the risk and uncertainty associated with the acquisition of these types of
systems (Verville, 2000).
Verville and Halingten (2003a, b) divide the acquisition process into six stages:
(1) the planning process;
(2) the information search process;
(3) the (pre-)selection process;
(4) the evaluation process;
(5) the choice process; and
(6) the negotiation process.
During the planning process, the acquisition team is formed. This team plans and
addresses as many issues as possible related with the other stages. During the
information search stage, information about technologies and vendors is not only
found, but screened, and its sources are evaluated. During the (pre-)selection process, a
short list of possible vendors and technologies is created. The elements of this list will
be evaluated in the next stage. They include a vendor evaluation, a functional
evaluation and a technical evaluation. The choice stage is the result of the evaluation
process. A final recommendation is made. It will finally be followed by a negotiation
process, which could be concluded by a final contract.
Research methodology
The research strategy for this study was a multiple-case design with three organizations
that had completed the purchase of ERP software. This approach provided the means for
an in-depth analysis of the construct of the ERP software acquisition process. This
approach was particularly well suited for this study because it unveiled a multitude of
factors and dimensions that make the acquisition of ERP software such a complex
process. The rationale for the multiple-case design was that as a research strategy, the
focus could be directed to understanding the dynamics and complexities present within
each case, these being the processes, critical issues, and influences of the software
acquisition within the organization (Yin, 1989; Miles and Huberman, 1994).
Site selection for the study was made according to the following criteria:
.
the acquisition had a significant impact on the organization;
.
the acquisition was significant, totalling several hundred thousand dollars or
more;
.
the type of packaged solution that was acquired was of a complex nature such as
ERPs;
.
the acquisition was a new purchase; and
.
the acquisition of the software was recently completed.
Critical factors
for successful
acquisitions
667
Downloaded by University College Cork At 06:17 27 October 2015 (PT)
JEIM
18,6
Data collection consisted of semi-structured interview questions. Interviews were
conducted with 15 individuals, each lasting approximately one hour and 15 minutes.
The three organizations (pseudonymously named, with the exception of Keller) are
described below.
668
OMEGA
Organizational profile. OMEGA, a large international carrier, provides air
transportation services for passengers and cargo to both domestic and international
arenas. Together with its regional partners, OMEGA’s route network provides
transportation services to 125 cities worldwide, including 97 cities in North America
and 22 cities in Europe, Asia, the Middle East and the Caribbean. It also provides
charter services to six international destinations as well as cargo services to 65
destinations worldwide.
OMEGA’s operations include a large aircraft and engine maintenance business that
provides maintenance services to airlines and other customers. Additional services
that are also offered include computer and ground handling services to airlines and
other customers. Among its holdings, OMEGA retains a 100 percent interest in five
regional airlines, in one of the largest computer reservation systems, and in a major
tour operator. It also holds minority interests in other travel and transportation-related
businesses.
Background. By 1995, OMEGA’s Honeywell-Bull mainframe system was running
with hardware and software that was more than ten years old. The system contained
information that was extremely important to its daily operations. With the system due
for changes, whether through upgrade, conversion, or replacement, action needed to be
taken.
In January 1995, the urgency of this situation was escalated when one of the
applications on the Bull failed. An investigation into the problem revealed that the
application had tried to perform a forward-looking date function (looking five years
ahead) that the Bull’s operating system did not support. It became evident that other
applications would experience the same problems and serious system failures on the
Bull were imminent.
So it was that in the Fall of 1995, the Information Technology Group presented a
“global” AFC (authority for commitment) to the Steering Committee for approval by
the Board in August 1996. This AFC authorized the IT Group to proceed, in the first
part, with an in-depth evaluation of the different alternatives available to OMEGA.
GAMMA
Organizational profile. GAMMA is a holding company for a gas and electric utility and
non-utility energy business. One of its subsidiaries, GAMMA Plus, supplies natural
gas and electricity to about 628,000 customers in Kentucky. The utility’s service area
covers approximately 700 square miles in 17 counties and includes Fort Knox Military
Reservation. Another of its subsidiaries, GAMMA Energy Systems, owns
co-generation projects and independent power plants in the USA as well as in
Argentina and Spain. The company markets energy and related services to customers
across the USA through high-revenue, low-margin GAMMA Energy Marketing.
Downloaded by University College Cork At 06:17 27 October 2015 (PT)
Background. In the early part of 1996, an internal study was conducted during
which it was determined that some major enhancements were required to GAMMA’s
financial systems. GAMMA’s financial systems consisted of four separate and distinct
general ledger systems, and separate “feeder” systems and modules such as accounts
payable and budgeting. None of these separate systems were linked in a manner that
enabled effective reduction in the monthly closing cycle duration, nor did these
systems enable the Finance and Accounting Organization to deliver value-added
analysis to management in a fashion that was consistent with the strategic direction of
the company. Further, these systems and processes relied heavily on manual effort to
gather and interpret much of the available information. Most often, human rather than
automated processes bridged the gaps between critical components of the financial
reporting value chain.
GAMMA’s financial system was IBM mainframe-based and was not Y2K
compliant. Their financial systems were, in many cases, antiquated, relying on
disjointed, outdated and technologically cumbersome software and hardware
platforms that would, within the next five or ten years, be unable to support their
business growth. While these systems supported their existing business needs, they
did so in a manner that was neither efficient nor functionally responsive to user needs.
Hence, in the early part of 1997, GAMMA Energy Corporation decided to acquire an
enterprise-wide solution for its general ledger, accounts payable, budgeting and
forecasting, and miscellaneous sundry billing, work orders and projects systems. This
integrated enterprise-wide solution would replace their existing independent systems.
Keller
Organizational background. Keller Manufacturing Company was established in 1895 as
a manufacturer of farm wagons and did so until 1943 when it began manufacturing
household furniture. Today, this organization has over 700 employees in three
manufacturing plants in the USA (two of them located in Indiana – Corydon and New
Salisbury – and one in Culpepper, Virginia) and manufactures over 2,000 different oak
and maple legs, seats, and other components (with over 100 separate procedures) that
are required in the assemblage of its products. In 1995, the company earned profits of
$3.1 million on sales of $46 million. This represented a 76 percent increase in profits
with only a 30 percent increase in sales from the previous year. In three short years,
Keller Manufacturing grew from $35 million in sales to $54 million in 1996,
representing a 54 percent increase in sales.
Background. During the last few years, Keller changed from a production-oriented
company to a very effective market-driven business. It also expanded its product line
to include bedroom furniture, a change that proved to be a very successful marketing
strategy. Consequently, the re-orientation of Keller’s marketing strategy with the
resulting increase in sales and new product introductions resulted in some production
challenges to their manufacturing operation. Manufacturing was having difficulty
supporting production demands brought on by the substantial increase in sales.
Mainly, they attributed the problem to the lack of timely and accurate information that
was necessary to effectively and efficiently plan for and control production.
At the time, Keller’s information systems consisted of a combination of manual
procedures and automated systems, with computers only being used by the engineers
Critical factors
for successful
acquisitions
669
JEIM
18,6
Downloaded by University College Cork At 06:17 27 October 2015 (PT)
670
and in manufacturing. The main computer (an AS400) handled batch-oriented
processing and was supported by a number of stand-alone PCs. These stand-alone
systems were originally installed in an effort to provide information that was
desperately needed to support manufacturing operations. However, with the recent and
sizable increase in sales and sales mix (expanded product-line), this type of information
system (manual and computerized) could no longer effectively support Keller’s
manufacturing operations.
In October 1995, with the realization that their existing system could no longer
sustain the current rate of growth, and in order to take full advantage of future market
trends, Keller’s senior management decided that the company would acquire a
manufacturing execution system (MES), or in effect, an extensive information system
for the shop floor.
The informants, all of whom were directly involved in the acquisition process,
included for OMEGA the Director of Information Technology, the Manager of Capital
Equipment Purchasing, a Project Director, a Project Control Officer and a Technical
Project Manager; for GAMMA the Financial Systems Project Manager, an IT Engineer
from Information Technology Planning (Technical Team Leader for the Financial
System), a member of the Procurement Group, an IT Analyst from Information
Technology Development (Technical Team Leader for the Materials Management and
Inventory System) and the Manager of Inventory Management (member of the
Reengineering Group); and for Keller, the VP of Information Systems, the VP of
Personnel, the Corporate Materials Manager, and a Plant Manager.
Open-ended questions were used throughout the interviews. They allowed for
flexibility and provided the “possibilities of depth; they [also] enable[d] the interviewer
to clear up misunderstanding[s] (through probing), to ascertain a respondent’s lack of
knowledge, to detect ambiguity, to encourage cooperation and achieve rapport, and to
make better estimates of the respondent’s true intentions, beliefs, and attitudes”
(Kerlinger, 1986, pp. 442-3).
For this part of the study, the opening question for the interview with each
informant was as follows: “In your opinion, what were the critical success factors for
the acquisition process for the ERP software?”. Following the informant’s description,
follow-up (probing) questions were used to clarify an issue or to delve for more
information. These follow-up questions also allowed for the development of ideas
without constraining the exploratory nature of the study. The same interviewing
protocol was observed with all of the informants.
All interviews were audiotaped for subsequent transcription and for verification of
accurate interpretation. Member checks were performed, during which the informants
were asked to review the transcription of their interviews for verification of the content
therein and, if necessary, to amend or add to them. Follow-up questions were asked,
when required, to further clarify ambiguities, discrepancies, or to re-confirm
information.
Critical success factors
It is noted that one critical factor alone is not going to make the ERP acquisition
process a success. It is rather the combination of several critical factors that will result
Downloaded by University College Cork At 06:17 27 October 2015 (PT)
in its successful outcome. Table I gives an overview of the critical success factors.
They can be divided into two groups:
(1) factors related to the acquisition as process; and
(2) factors related to people within the process.
Planned and structured process
Planning was highly critical to the ERP acquisition process. With there being so many
activities and issues that need to be considered, the odds of having a successful
acquisition will be greatly increased the more care that is taken to do this activity well.
The plan should define from the beginning not only the structure of the process, but
also the techniques that will be used to manage the acquisition process. A well-defined
structure for the acquisition process also presupposes the need for a clear authority.
Also, since many elements need to be accounted for during the acquisition process, it
was noted in each of the cases that if attention and care were given to dealing with
them at the acquisition stage, there would be fewer issues and problems (surprises)
that would arise during the implementation stage.
Critical factors
for successful
acquisitions
671
Rigorous process
Rigor is another factor that defined the acquisition process as the teams carried it out.
If the Acquisition Team was lax in carrying out any part of the acquisition process, the
results were likely to show in the final choice of ERP solution for the organization.
Moreover, since much of the preliminary work that was done during the acquisition
process (i.e. definition of requirements and addressing of issues regarding process
reengineering or redesign, etc.) could be used during the implementation, the more
rigorously the acquisition process was carried out, the better it would become for the
implementation.
Definition of all requirements
It was of critical importance that the Acquisition Team thoroughly assessed and
defined all of the current and desired requirements that were relevant to the packaged
ERP. This meant defining the organization’s needs at all of its different levels and in all
of the functional areas that the ERP would have a direct or indirect impact on. It was
critical that this activity be completed before contacting vendors or doing the
marketplace analysis.
Factors related to the acquisition as process
Factors related to people within this process
Planned and structured process
Rigorous process
Definition of all requirements
Establishment of selection and evaluation criteria
Accurate information
Clear and unambiguous authority
Careful selection of the Acquisition Team members
Partnership approach
User participation
User buy-in
Table I.
Critical success factors
for the ERP acquisition
process
Downloaded by University College Cork At 06:17 27 October 2015 (PT)
JEIM
18,6
Establishment of selection and evaluation criteria
As with the definition of all organizational requirements, it was important and critical
for all three cases that the Team established its selection and evaluation criteria prior
to contacting any vendor or looking at ERP solutions. This was critical to the
determination of the right fit.
672
Accurate information
Since the entire acquisition process was fuelled by information, it was absolutely
imperative that the information was accurate and reliable. Hence, it was necessary that
information sources were verified and crosschecked as to the quality of the information
they provided. While reputation and credibility may speak to the accuracy and
reliability of the information obtained, these also should be double-checked. As was
seen in the case of GAMMA, although one of the consultants that had supplied the
Acquisition Team with information was from a reputable consulting firm, the
consultant’s former ties with one of the ERP vendors biased the information that he
provided to GAMMA Acquisition Team and resulted in GAMMA dropping the vendor
from their long-list. Although GAMMA later chose the ERP from that vendor, the
biased information from that consultant could have resulted in GAMMA settling on
the “wrong” or less than optimal ERP solution for its needs – misinformation could
have been very costly to GAMMA.
Clear and unambiguous authority
Any ambiguity in authority tends to diffuse accountability and increase the possibility
of the process being diverted, or unduly shortened or abbreviated, or of conflict arising
not only on complex issues but on minor ones as well. Hence, a “clear authority” for the
acquisition process stands out as critical for the acquisition process as for the rest of
the process. It appears that this “authority” or “project leader/manager/director” need
not be an individual from the IT department, but should be someone with strong
leadership skills and a good sense of objectivity.
Careful selection of the Acquisition Team members
While the careful selection of team members is critical for any project, it is especially
critical for the acquisition of ERP. Since this type of technological solution is so
complex and diverse in nature, the Acquisition Team needs to be equally diverse in the
skills that are required of its team members. Hence, each individual team member
needs to have the appropriate skills necessary for the completion of specific sets of
tasks or responsibilities within the project. Moreover, each individual team member
needs to be selected to perform a functional and/or advisory role based on his/her
abilities or past experiences.
Partnership approach
Another characteristic of the acquisition process that was also noted as a critical factor
was the “partnership” approach that was adopted by all of the teams with their
vendors of choice. While this approach was also adopted by all of the teams with their
organizations’ user communities, none was more strongly emphasized and evidenced
than by the teams from OMEGA and Keller. OMEGA’s Project Director stated that the
creation of a “partnership approach (internally) with the various user communities,
letting them come up with a recommendation that they felt comfortable with”, led to
the users giving their full buy-in to the acquisition. OMEGA used this approach
similarly with their Purchasing Department. In all of the cases, this approach was used
to establish a more open working relationship with the vendors with the objective of
avoiding conflict situations. The question that was frequently asked by all concerned
was, “Can we work with them?”. In the words of OMEGA’s Project Director:
Downloaded by University College Cork At 06:17 27 October 2015 (PT)
If this is the vendor that you are going to deal with for the next five to ten years, you had
better make sure that you can do business with those people and when it gets tough, that you
can resolve those things.
The element of trust factored into this characteristic and all parties felt the need to
create an atmosphere of trust right from the start of their dealings with the vendors.
User participation
User participation in the acquisition, especially at the vendor demonstrations, was also
considered very important for all of the cases. User participation and user buy-in can
be strongly related. If users participate, they gain a better understanding of the issues
and technologies, and then they can make up their mind and feel part of the acquisition
process (increase their buy-in) and, in return, if they see the ERP as important for the
organization then their participation can increase.
User buy-in
In all of the cases, but especially for OMEGA and Keller, user buy-in was a critical
factor in the success of the acquisition process. User buy-in on the final choice of the
ERP acquisition will undoubtedly result in user acceptance of the software following
implementation. This was evident in the case of Keller. User buy-in of the choice of
technology and even excitement and enthusiasm about its prospects for the
organization usually translated into an open acceptance by the users of the software
following implementation. We might also add that it creates openness to the
technology, which could translate into a shortened learning curve. This would mean
that the organization, as a whole, could derive benefits a lot sooner, i.e. a return to
pre-implementation production levels, or as is hoped with the new ERP, better
production levels. So, there can be several advantages to getting the users involved and
obtaining their buy-in.
We can also note that some of those factors span the whole acquisition process,
when others are more related to one particular stage of the process. More particularly,
during the whole acquisition, the process will need to be rigorous. Even if the “clear
and unambiguous authority”, the “user buy-in” development and maintenance and the
“partnership approach” must be maintained during of all the process, they also appear
as a prerequisite of this process. Without strong leadership manifested by authority,
the complete process will probably not even begin. “User buy-in” and “partnership
approach” are cultural dimensions of the organization and the acquisition process can
reinforce them, but at least the will to create them must be present. We can also notice
that “user buy-in” is crucial for the choice stage and the “participation approach” for
the negotiation stage. The relation of four factors with the first stage, the planning,
Critical factors
for successful
acquisitions
673
JEIM
18,6
Downloaded by University College Cork At 06:17 27 October 2015 (PT)
674
Figure 1.
Relationship between ERP
acquisition process and its
critical success factors
makes this phase one of the most important for the success of the whole process. It is
almost a critical success factor by itself. Finally, “accurate information” will be the
result of a good information search stage and “user participation” is essential during
the evaluation stage. Figure 1 shows the relationship between the stages and the
critical success factors.
Conclusion
The acquisition of ERP systems is a complex task fraught with a high level of risk and
uncertainty. It is important, therefore, to understand which critical factors would lead
to a successful ERP acquisition outcome. This study identified ten factors critical to the
successful outcome of an ERP acquisition. Their omission would have resulted in a less
than optimal outcome for the organization. For each of the three cases, the acquisition
of ERP software was a new experience. Hence, each organization planned and
structured an acquisition process that would provide them with a sense of order,
control, and direction. Omega’s Project Manager, for example, stated that his teams
attributed their project’s success to the fact that the process was very structured and
well planned. In addition, in all three cases, a “partnership” approach was adopted by
the teams (organizations) with the vendors (for a long-term relationship) and,
specifically in the cases of OMEGA and Keller, the user community(ies) within their
organizations. OMEGA’s Project Director stated that the creation of a “partnership
approach (internally) with the various user communities, [let] them come up with a
recommendation that they felt comfortable with”, and led to the users giving their full
buy-in to the acquisition. Thus, user buy-in for both OMEGA and Keller was
considered by each of these organizations to be very important to the successful
outcome of their acquisition process. According to Keller’s Plant Manager, they wanted
to have full user buy-in to ensure the success of the acquisition and hence, they
involved the users early in the process. All in all, in each of the cases, a clear and
unambiguous authority was essential to a successful outcome.
While each CSF is important, it should be noted that no one CSF alone is going to
make an ERP acquisition successful. It is rather the combination of several critical
factors that will result in its successful outcome.
The next phase of research will aim at comparing these critical success factors with
those found in the literature regarding the implementation of ERPs in order to answer
the following questions:
.
Are they comparable?
.
Do they complement each other?
Downloaded by University College Cork At 06:17 27 October 2015 (PT)
An analysis of the CSFs from both areas will lead us to a more integrated view of ERP’s
key management issues and will span ERP’s life cycle from acquisition to
implementation.
References
Akkermans, H. and Van Helden, K. (2002), “Vicious and virtuous cycles in ERP implementation:
a case study of interrelations between critical success factors”, European Journal of
Information Systems, Vol. 11, pp. 35-46.
Al-Mashari, M., Al-Mudimigh, A. and Zairi, M. (2003), “Enterprise resource planning: a taxonomy
of critical factors”, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 146, pp. 352-64.
Appleton, E.L. (1997), “How to survive ERP”, Datamation, Vol. 43 No. 3, pp. 50-3.
Best, C. (1997), “Integrated system built on human foundation”, Computing Canada, Vol. 23
No. 25, p. 54.
Bingi, P., Sharma, M.K. and Godla, J.K. (1999), “Critical issues affecting an ERP implementation”,
Information Systems Management, Summer, pp. 7-14.
Boudreau, M.C. and Robey, D. (1999), “Organizational transition to enterprise resource planning
systems: theoretical choices for process research”, Proceedings ICIS, Charlotte, NC,
pp. 291-9.
Chung, S.H. and Snyder, C.A. (2000), “ERP adoption: a technological evolution approach”,
International Journal of Agile System Management Systems, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 24-30.
Chwen, S., Bongsug, C. and Yang, C.L. (2004), “National differences and ERP implementation:
issues and challenges”, Omega, Vol. 32 No. 5, pp. 361-71.
Davenport, T. (1998), “Putting the enterprise into the enterprise system”, Harvard Business
Review, July-August, pp. 121-31.
Eckhouse, J. (1999), “ERP vendors plot a comeback”, Information Week, No. 718, pp. 126-8.
Esteves, J. and Pastor, J. (2001), “Enterprise resource planning systems research: an annotated
bibliography”, Communications of the AIS, Vol. 7 No. 8, pp. 1-52.
Everdingen, Y., Hillegersberg, J. and Waarts, E. (2000), “ERP adoption by European midsize
companies”, Communications of the ACM, Vol. 43 No. 4, pp. 27-31.
Gibson, J., Holland, C. and Light, B. (1999), “Enterprise resource planning: a business approach to
systems development”, Proceedings of the 32nd Hawaii International Conference on
Science Systems (HICSS), pp. 163-68.
Glover, S.M., Prawitt, D.F. and Romney, M.B. (1999), “Implementing ERP”, Internal Auditor,
Vol. 56 No. 1, pp. 40-7.
Hill, S. Jr (1999), “It just takes work”, Manufacturing Systems, Selecting and Implementing
Enterprise Solutions Supplement, pp. A2-A10.
Critical factors
for successful
acquisitions
675
JEIM
18,6
Downloaded by University College Cork At 06:17 27 October 2015 (PT)
676
Holland, C. and Light, B. (1999), “Critical success factors model for ERP implementation”, IEEE
Software, May/June, pp. 1630-6.
Hong, K-K. and Kim, Y.-G. (2002), “The critical success factors for ERP implementation:
an organizational fit perspective”, Information & Management, Vol. 40, pp. 25-40.
Kerlinger, F.N. (1986), Foundations of Behavioral Research, 3rd ed., Holt Rinehart & Winston,
Chicago, IL.
Koh, C., Soh, C. and Markus, L. (2000), “A process theory approach to analyzing ERP
implementation and impacts: the case of Revel Asia”, Journal of Information Technology
Cases and Applications, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 4-23.
Kumar, K. and Hillegersberg, J. (2000), “ERP experiences and evolution”, Communications of the
ACM, Vol. 43 No. 4, pp. 23-6.
Lee, Z. and Lee, J. (2000), “An ERP implementation case study from a knowledge transfer
perspective”, Journal of Information Technology, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 281-8.
McNurlin, B.C. and Sprague, R.H. Jr (1998), Information Systems Management in Practice, 4th ed.,
Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Markus, M., Tanis, C. and Fenema, P. (2000), “Multisite ERP implementations”, Communications
of the ACM, Vol. 43 No. 4, pp. 42-6.
Miles, M.B. and Huberman, A.M. (1994), Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook,
2nd ed., Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Miranda, R. (1999), “The rise of ERP technology in the public sector”, Government Finance
Review, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 9-17.
Nah, F.F.-H., Lau, J.L.-S. and Kuang, J. (2001), “Critical factors for successful implementation of
enterprise systems”, Business Process Management Journal, Vol. 7 No. 3, pp. 285-96.
PricewaterhouseCoopers (1998), Technology Forecast: 1999, 10th anniversary ed.,
PricewaterhouseCoopers Technology Center, Menlo Park, CA.
Riper, K. and Durham, M.J. (1999), “Phased ERP implementation: the city of Des Moines
experience”, Government Finance Review, pp. 37-42.
Scott, J.E. and Vessey, I. (2000), “Implementing enterprise resource planning systems: the role of
learning from failure”, Information Systems Frontiers, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 213-32.
Soh, C., Kien, S. and Tay-Yap, J. (2000), “Cultural fits and misfits: is ERP a universal solution?”,
Communications of the ACM, Vol. 43 No. 4, pp. 47-51.
Soliman, F., Clegg, S. and Tantoush, T. (2001), “Critical success factors for integration of
CAD/CAM systems with ERP systems”, International Journal of Operations & Production
Management, Vol. 21 Nos 5/6, pp. 609-29.
Stafyla, A. and Stefanou, C.J. (2000), “ERP software selection: a study using cognitive maps”,
Proceedings of the 7th European Conference on Information Technology Evaluation
(ECITE), pp. 293-301.
Sutcliffe, A. (1999), “Towards a theoretical framework for engineering reusable components”,
Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Enterprise Management Resource and
Planning Systems, EMRPS, pp. 103-17.
Verville, J.C. (2000), “An empirical study of organizational buying behavior: a critical
investigation of the acquisition of ‘ERP software’”, dissertation, Universite´ Laval, Que´bec.
Verville, J. and Halingten, A. (2001), Acquiring Enterprise Software: Beating the Vendors at Their
Own Game, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Verville, J. and Halingten, A. (2003a), “The effect of team composition in the ERP acquisition
decisions”, Team Performance Management Journal, Vol. 9 No. 5, pp. 115-30.
Verville, J. and Halingten, A. (2003b), “A six-stage model of the buying process for ERP
software”, Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 32, pp. 585-94.
Yin, R.K. (1989), Case Study Research: Design and Methods, Sage Publications, London.
Downloaded by University College Cork At 06:17 27 October 2015 (PT)
Further reading
Maxwell, J.A. (1996), Qualitative Research Design: An Interactive Approach, Sage Publications,
Thousand Oaks, CA.
(Jacques Verville is currently an Associate Professor of Management of Information Systems in
the College of Business Administration at Texas A&M International University. He holds a PhD
in Organizational Information Systems form the University Laval, Quebec, Canada. He has
authored over 30 publications including conference proceedings papers and articles published in
a number of journals including Industrial Marketing Management, International Journal of
Enterprise Information Systems, International Journal of Technology Management, Journal of
Information Technology Cases and Applications, International Journal of Manufacturing
Technology Management, and International Journal of Qualitative Market Research. Dr Verville
is co-author of Acquiring Enterprise Software: Beating the Vendors at their Own Game.
Christine Bernadas is a Doctoral Candidate in International Business Administration,
concentration in Management Information Systems. Ms Bernadas has a number of articles
published in conference proceedings and journals including the International Journal of
Technology Management, and International Journal of Enterprise Information Systems. Her
current research interest are on ERPs, evaluation and business intelligence.
Alannah Halingten is a Consultant (Halingten-Verville & Associates). She has authored over
ten articles published in a number of journals including Industrial Marketing Management,
International Journal of Enterprise Information Systems, Journal of Information Technology
Cases and Applications, International Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, and
International Journal of Qualitative Market Research. Ms Halingten is co-author of Acquiring
Enterprise Software: Beating the Vendors at their Own Game.)
Critical factors
for successful
acquisitions
677
Downloaded by University College Cork At 06:17 27 October 2015 (PT)
This article has been cited by:
1. Michael Essig, Andreas H. Glas, Josef Gutsmiedl. 2015. Procurement of a supply information system.
Journal of Enterprise Information Management 28:3, 377-399. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
2. Ramaraj Palanisamy, Jacques Verville, Nazim Taskin. 2015. The critical success factors (CSFs) for
Enterprise Software contract negotiations. Journal of Enterprise Information Management 28:1, 34-59.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
3. Huseyin Selcuk Kilic, Selim Zaim, Dursun Delen. 2014. Development of a hybrid methodology for ERP
system selection: The case of Turkish Airlines. Decision Support Systems 66, 82-92. [CrossRef]
4. Placide Poba-Nzaou, Louis Raymond. 2013. Custom Development as an Alternative for ERP Adoption
by SMEs: An Interpretive Case Study. Information Systems Management 30, 319-335. [CrossRef]
5. Payam Hanafizadeh, Ahad Zare Ravasan. 2013. A McKinsey 7S Model-Based Framework for ERP
Readiness Assessment. International Journal of Enterprise Information Systems 7:10.4018/jeis.20111001,
23-63. [CrossRef]
6. Magdy Abdel-Kader, Thu Phuong Nguyen. 2013. An Investigation of Enterprise Resource Planning
Implementation in a Small Firm. International Journal of Enterprise Information Systems 7:10.4018/
jeis.20110101, 18-40. [CrossRef]
7. Benoit Aubert, Pierre-Majorique Léger, Denis Larocque. 2012. Differentiating weak ties and strong
ties among external sources of influences for enterprise resource planning (ERP) adoption. Enterprise
Information Systems 6, 215-235. [CrossRef]
8. Amin Amid, Morteza Moalagh, Ahad Zare Ravasan. 2012. Identification and classification of ERP critical
failure factors in Iranian industries. Information Systems 37, 227-237. [CrossRef]
9. Andrejs Tambovcevs. 2012. ERP system implementation in Latvian manufacturing and construction
company. Technological and Economic Development of Economy 18, 67-83. [CrossRef]
10. Adnéne Hajji, Robert Pellerin, Pierre-Majorique Léger, Ali Gharbi, Gilbert Babin. 2012. Dynamic pricing
models for ERP systems under network externality. International Journal of Production Economics 135,
708-715. [CrossRef]
11. Ramaraj Palanisamy, Jacques Verville, Christine Bernadas, Nazim Taskin. 2010. An empirical study
on the influences on the acquisition of enterprise software decisions. Journal of Enterprise Information
Management 23:5, 610-639. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
12. A. Momoh, R. Roy, E. Shehab. 2010. Challenges in enterprise resource planning implementation: state‐
of‐the‐art. Business Process Management Journal 16:4, 537-565. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
13. S.C.L. Koh, A. Gunasekaran, J.R. Cooper. 2009. The demand for training and consultancy investment in
SME-specific ERP systems implementation and operation. International Journal of Production Economics
122, 241-254. [CrossRef]
14. Haider H. Madani. 2009. The role of internal auditors in ERP‐based organizations. Journal of Accounting
& Organizational Change 5:4, 514-526. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
15. Ömür Y. Saatçıoğlu. 2009. What determines user satisfaction in ERP projects: benefits, barriers or risks?.
Journal of Enterprise Information Management 22:6, 690-708. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
16. Frank Lin, C.E. Tapie Rohm. 2009. Managers' and end‐users' concerns on innovation implementation.
Business Process Management Journal 15:4, 527-547. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
17. Jau‐Rong Chen. 2009. An exploratory study of alignment ERP implementation and organizational
development activities in a newly established firm. Journal of Enterprise Information Management 22:3,
298-316. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
18. Payam Hanafizadeh, Ahad Zare RavasanA McKinsey 7S Model-Based Framework for ERP Readiness
Assessment 141-183. [CrossRef]
Downloaded by University College Cork At 06:17 27 October 2015 (PT)
19. Magdy Abdel-Kader, Thu Phuong NguyenAn Investigation of Enterprise Resource Planning
Implementation in a Small Firm 57-80. [CrossRef]
So you're thinking of buying an ERP? Ten critical factors for successful acquisitions
Jacques Verville Christine Bernadas Alannah Halingten
Article information:
Downloaded by University College Cork At 06:17 27 October 2015 (PT)
To cite this document:
Jacques Verville Christine Bernadas Alannah Halingten, (2005),"So you're thinking of buying an ERP? Ten
critical factors for successful acquisitions", Journal of Enterprise Information Management, Vol. 18 Iss 6 pp.
665 - 677
Permanent link to this document:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17410390510628373
Downloaded on: 27 October 2015, At: 06:17 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 39 other documents.
To copy this document: [email protected]
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 2725 times since 2006*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
Carl Marnewick, Lessing Labuschagne, (2005),"A conceptual model for enterprise resource planning
(ERP)", Information Management & Computer Security, Vol. 13 Iss 2 pp. 144-155 http://
dx.doi.org/10.1108/09685220510589325
David Sammon, Frederic Adam, (2005),"Towards a model of organisational prerequisites for enterprisewide systems integration: Examining ERP and data warehousing", Journal of Enterprise Information
Management, Vol. 18 Iss 4 pp. 458-470 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17410390510609608
Sherry Finney, Martin Corbett, (2007),"ERP implementation: a compilation and analysis of critical
success factors", Business Process Management Journal, Vol. 13 Iss 3 pp. 329-347 http://
dx.doi.org/10.1108/14637150710752272
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:409798 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for
Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines
are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as
providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee
on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive
preservation.
*Related content and download information correct at time of download.
The Emerald Research Register for this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/researchregister
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/1741-0398.htm
So you’re thinking of buying an
ERP? Ten critical factors for
successful acquisitions
Jacques Verville and Christine Bernadas
Critical factors
for successful
acquisitions
665
Department of Management Information Systems & Decision Science,
Texas A&M International University, Laredo, Texas, USA, and
Alannah Halingten
Downloaded by University College Cork At 06:17 27 October 2015 (PT)
Halingten-Verville & Associates, Laredo, Texas, USA
Abstract
Purpose – This paper aims to present a discussion of the critical success factors (CSF) that affect the
acquisition process for enterprise resource planning (ERP) software.
Design/methodology/approach – The research strategy was a multiple-case design with three
organizations that had recently completed the acquisition of an ERP solution. The rationale for the
multiple-case design was that, as a research strategy, the focus could be directed to understanding the
dynamics and complexities present within each case, these being critical success factors of the ERP
software acquisition process within the organization.
Findings – This study identified ten factors critical to the successful outcome of acquiring an ERP
solution. Their omission would have resulted in a less than optimal outcome for the organization. For
each of the three cases, the elements that stand out the most are as follows: clear and unambiguous
authority, a structured, rigorous and user-driven process, its planning, the establishment of criteria,
and the sense of partnership that the team works to establish not only with various user commitments,
but also with the potential vendor.
Originality/value – It is important to note that no one CSF alone is going to make an ERP
acquisition successful. It is rather the combination of several critical factors that will result in its
successful outcome.
Keywords Manufacturing resource planning, Computer software, Critical success factors
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
Enterprise resource planning (ERP) software is a suite of application modules that can
link back-office operations to front-office operations as well as internal and external
supply chains. It conjoins functional areas and business processes in an integrated
environment that provides a broad scope of applicability for organizations (Verville
and Halingten, 2001; PricewaterhouseCoopers, 1998). While considered a viable
alternative to in-house development (Verville, 2000; Eckhouse, 1999; McNurlin and
Sprague, 1998), the acquisition of ERP software is not without its challenges. It is
considered a high-expenditure activity that consumes a significant portion of an
organization’s capital budget. It is also an activity that is fraught with a high level of
risk and uncertainty. Why? Because, first of all, if a wrong purchase is made, it can
adversely affect the organization as a whole, in several different areas and on several
different levels, even to the point of jeopardizing the very existence of the organization.
This highlights the obvious need for making the right choice of software. It also brings
Journal of Enterprise Information
Management
Vol. 18 No. 6, 2005
pp. 665-677
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
1741-0398
DOI 10.1108/17410390510628373
JEIM
18,6
Downloaded by University College Cork At 06:17 27 October 2015 (PT)
666
to light the need for finding the best means for acquiring this type of software so that
the right choice can be made (Verville and Halingten, 2001; Hill, 1999).
In light of these concerns, a research project was undertaken to determine the best
way to acquire ERP software. However, with little research found on the topic of ERP
acquisitions, it first became necessary to find out what indeed the process is that
organizations go through to buy ERP software (Esteves and Pastor, 2001).
The focus of this paper, then, is on the critical success factors of the acquisition
process for ERP software. The paper will begin with a literature review and continue
with the research methodology used for the study. Finally, the critical success factors
expressed by the practitioners will be presented.
Literature review
A review of the literature in the field of MIS shows that research conducted in the area
of ERPs has concentrated on implementation and post-implementation issues (Esteves
and Pastor, 2001; Verville, 2000). The type of problems and issues that arise from the
implementation of ERP systems range from specific issues and problems that can come
up during the installation of an ERP, to behavioral, procedural, political, and
organizational changes, etc., that manifest subsequent to the installation. For instance,
Gibson et al. (1999) argue that ERP implementation requires a different approach
which focuses on business process design, software configuration and project
management by de-emphasizing the technical side of implementation. Another
research area is that of organizational change. In this area, Boudreau and Robey (1999)
present a framework to guide research on ERP-related organizational transition (i.e.
organizational change as a process). Another study by Koh et al. (2000) uses a
framework, based on a process theory approach, to understand and explain the ERP
implementation experiences of organizations. Another subject of research within the
area of organizational change is the roles of individuals within organizations. In this
vein, Davenport (1998) states that ERP implementation process roles, responsibilities
and skill sets change substantially from those associated with a traditional
implementation. Other interesting topics for research include user buy-in,
commitment (management, team, organization, etc.), ERP adoption, leadership,
organizational culture, stakeholders, organizational learning, organizational
effectiveness, business process modeling, ERP development issues, and
communications, to name but a few (Chwen et al., 2004; Verville and Halingten,
2003a, b; Chung and Snyder, 2000; Everdingen et al., 2000; Kumar and Hillegersberg,
2000; Lee and Lee, 2000; Markus et al., 2000; Stafyla and Stefanou, 2000; Soh et al., 2000;
Glover et al., 1999; Miranda, 1999; Riper and Durham, 1999; Sutcliffe, 1999; Appleton,
1997; Best, 1997).
As for the literature that combines critical success factors and ERP software, all the
articles (Al-Mashari et al., 2003; Akkermans and Van Helden, 2002; Hong and Kim,
2002; Nah et al., 2001; Soliman et al., 2001; Scott and Vessey, 2000; Bingi et al., 1999;
Holland and Light, 1999) explicitly focus on the critical success factors for the
implementation process.
The issue of the acquisition process for ERP software is for the most part being
ignored. This issue is important, however, because as the stage preceding the
implementation process, it presents the opportunity for both researchers and
Downloaded by University College Cork At 06:17 27 October 2015 (PT)
practitioners to examine all of the dimensions and implications (benefits, risks,
challenges, costs, etc.) of buying and implementing ERP software prior to the
commitment of formidable amounts of money, time and resources. Hence, a clearer
understanding of the critical factors could amount to substantial savings in terms of
economics (actual cost), time, and improved administrative procedures, and could
lessen the risk and uncertainty associated with the acquisition of these types of
systems (Verville, 2000).
Verville and Halingten (2003a, b) divide the acquisition process into six stages:
(1) the planning process;
(2) the information search process;
(3) the (pre-)selection process;
(4) the evaluation process;
(5) the choice process; and
(6) the negotiation process.
During the planning process, the acquisition team is formed. This team plans and
addresses as many issues as possible related with the other stages. During the
information search stage, information about technologies and vendors is not only
found, but screened, and its sources are evaluated. During the (pre-)selection process, a
short list of possible vendors and technologies is created. The elements of this list will
be evaluated in the next stage. They include a vendor evaluation, a functional
evaluation and a technical evaluation. The choice stage is the result of the evaluation
process. A final recommendation is made. It will finally be followed by a negotiation
process, which could be concluded by a final contract.
Research methodology
The research strategy for this study was a multiple-case design with three organizations
that had completed the purchase of ERP software. This approach provided the means for
an in-depth analysis of the construct of the ERP software acquisition process. This
approach was particularly well suited for this study because it unveiled a multitude of
factors and dimensions that make the acquisition of ERP software such a complex
process. The rationale for the multiple-case design was that as a research strategy, the
focus could be directed to understanding the dynamics and complexities present within
each case, these being the processes, critical issues, and influences of the software
acquisition within the organization (Yin, 1989; Miles and Huberman, 1994).
Site selection for the study was made according to the following criteria:
.
the acquisition had a significant impact on the organization;
.
the acquisition was significant, totalling several hundred thousand dollars or
more;
.
the type of packaged solution that was acquired was of a complex nature such as
ERPs;
.
the acquisition was a new purchase; and
.
the acquisition of the software was recently completed.
Critical factors
for successful
acquisitions
667
Downloaded by University College Cork At 06:17 27 October 2015 (PT)
JEIM
18,6
Data collection consisted of semi-structured interview questions. Interviews were
conducted with 15 individuals, each lasting approximately one hour and 15 minutes.
The three organizations (pseudonymously named, with the exception of Keller) are
described below.
668
OMEGA
Organizational profile. OMEGA, a large international carrier, provides air
transportation services for passengers and cargo to both domestic and international
arenas. Together with its regional partners, OMEGA’s route network provides
transportation services to 125 cities worldwide, including 97 cities in North America
and 22 cities in Europe, Asia, the Middle East and the Caribbean. It also provides
charter services to six international destinations as well as cargo services to 65
destinations worldwide.
OMEGA’s operations include a large aircraft and engine maintenance business that
provides maintenance services to airlines and other customers. Additional services
that are also offered include computer and ground handling services to airlines and
other customers. Among its holdings, OMEGA retains a 100 percent interest in five
regional airlines, in one of the largest computer reservation systems, and in a major
tour operator. It also holds minority interests in other travel and transportation-related
businesses.
Background. By 1995, OMEGA’s Honeywell-Bull mainframe system was running
with hardware and software that was more than ten years old. The system contained
information that was extremely important to its daily operations. With the system due
for changes, whether through upgrade, conversion, or replacement, action needed to be
taken.
In January 1995, the urgency of this situation was escalated when one of the
applications on the Bull failed. An investigation into the problem revealed that the
application had tried to perform a forward-looking date function (looking five years
ahead) that the Bull’s operating system did not support. It became evident that other
applications would experience the same problems and serious system failures on the
Bull were imminent.
So it was that in the Fall of 1995, the Information Technology Group presented a
“global” AFC (authority for commitment) to the Steering Committee for approval by
the Board in August 1996. This AFC authorized the IT Group to proceed, in the first
part, with an in-depth evaluation of the different alternatives available to OMEGA.
GAMMA
Organizational profile. GAMMA is a holding company for a gas and electric utility and
non-utility energy business. One of its subsidiaries, GAMMA Plus, supplies natural
gas and electricity to about 628,000 customers in Kentucky. The utility’s service area
covers approximately 700 square miles in 17 counties and includes Fort Knox Military
Reservation. Another of its subsidiaries, GAMMA Energy Systems, owns
co-generation projects and independent power plants in the USA as well as in
Argentina and Spain. The company markets energy and related services to customers
across the USA through high-revenue, low-margin GAMMA Energy Marketing.
Downloaded by University College Cork At 06:17 27 October 2015 (PT)
Background. In the early part of 1996, an internal study was conducted during
which it was determined that some major enhancements were required to GAMMA’s
financial systems. GAMMA’s financial systems consisted of four separate and distinct
general ledger systems, and separate “feeder” systems and modules such as accounts
payable and budgeting. None of these separate systems were linked in a manner that
enabled effective reduction in the monthly closing cycle duration, nor did these
systems enable the Finance and Accounting Organization to deliver value-added
analysis to management in a fashion that was consistent with the strategic direction of
the company. Further, these systems and processes relied heavily on manual effort to
gather and interpret much of the available information. Most often, human rather than
automated processes bridged the gaps between critical components of the financial
reporting value chain.
GAMMA’s financial system was IBM mainframe-based and was not Y2K
compliant. Their financial systems were, in many cases, antiquated, relying on
disjointed, outdated and technologically cumbersome software and hardware
platforms that would, within the next five or ten years, be unable to support their
business growth. While these systems supported their existing business needs, they
did so in a manner that was neither efficient nor functionally responsive to user needs.
Hence, in the early part of 1997, GAMMA Energy Corporation decided to acquire an
enterprise-wide solution for its general ledger, accounts payable, budgeting and
forecasting, and miscellaneous sundry billing, work orders and projects systems. This
integrated enterprise-wide solution would replace their existing independent systems.
Keller
Organizational background. Keller Manufacturing Company was established in 1895 as
a manufacturer of farm wagons and did so until 1943 when it began manufacturing
household furniture. Today, this organization has over 700 employees in three
manufacturing plants in the USA (two of them located in Indiana – Corydon and New
Salisbury – and one in Culpepper, Virginia) and manufactures over 2,000 different oak
and maple legs, seats, and other components (with over 100 separate procedures) that
are required in the assemblage of its products. In 1995, the company earned profits of
$3.1 million on sales of $46 million. This represented a 76 percent increase in profits
with only a 30 percent increase in sales from the previous year. In three short years,
Keller Manufacturing grew from $35 million in sales to $54 million in 1996,
representing a 54 percent increase in sales.
Background. During the last few years, Keller changed from a production-oriented
company to a very effective market-driven business. It also expanded its product line
to include bedroom furniture, a change that proved to be a very successful marketing
strategy. Consequently, the re-orientation of Keller’s marketing strategy with the
resulting increase in sales and new product introductions resulted in some production
challenges to their manufacturing operation. Manufacturing was having difficulty
supporting production demands brought on by the substantial increase in sales.
Mainly, they attributed the problem to the lack of timely and accurate information that
was necessary to effectively and efficiently plan for and control production.
At the time, Keller’s information systems consisted of a combination of manual
procedures and automated systems, with computers only being used by the engineers
Critical factors
for successful
acquisitions
669
JEIM
18,6
Downloaded by University College Cork At 06:17 27 October 2015 (PT)
670
and in manufacturing. The main computer (an AS400) handled batch-oriented
processing and was supported by a number of stand-alone PCs. These stand-alone
systems were originally installed in an effort to provide information that was
desperately needed to support manufacturing operations. However, with the recent and
sizable increase in sales and sales mix (expanded product-line), this type of information
system (manual and computerized) could no longer effectively support Keller’s
manufacturing operations.
In October 1995, with the realization that their existing system could no longer
sustain the current rate of growth, and in order to take full advantage of future market
trends, Keller’s senior management decided that the company would acquire a
manufacturing execution system (MES), or in effect, an extensive information system
for the shop floor.
The informants, all of whom were directly involved in the acquisition process,
included for OMEGA the Director of Information Technology, the Manager of Capital
Equipment Purchasing, a Project Director, a Project Control Officer and a Technical
Project Manager; for GAMMA the Financial Systems Project Manager, an IT Engineer
from Information Technology Planning (Technical Team Leader for the Financial
System), a member of the Procurement Group, an IT Analyst from Information
Technology Development (Technical Team Leader for the Materials Management and
Inventory System) and the Manager of Inventory Management (member of the
Reengineering Group); and for Keller, the VP of Information Systems, the VP of
Personnel, the Corporate Materials Manager, and a Plant Manager.
Open-ended questions were used throughout the interviews. They allowed for
flexibility and provided the “possibilities of depth; they [also] enable[d] the interviewer
to clear up misunderstanding[s] (through probing), to ascertain a respondent’s lack of
knowledge, to detect ambiguity, to encourage cooperation and achieve rapport, and to
make better estimates of the respondent’s true intentions, beliefs, and attitudes”
(Kerlinger, 1986, pp. 442-3).
For this part of the study, the opening question for the interview with each
informant was as follows: “In your opinion, what were the critical success factors for
the acquisition process for the ERP software?”. Following the informant’s description,
follow-up (probing) questions were used to clarify an issue or to delve for more
information. These follow-up questions also allowed for the development of ideas
without constraining the exploratory nature of the study. The same interviewing
protocol was observed with all of the informants.
All interviews were audiotaped for subsequent transcription and for verification of
accurate interpretation. Member checks were performed, during which the informants
were asked to review the transcription of their interviews for verification of the content
therein and, if necessary, to amend or add to them. Follow-up questions were asked,
when required, to further clarify ambiguities, discrepancies, or to re-confirm
information.
Critical success factors
It is noted that one critical factor alone is not going to make the ERP acquisition
process a success. It is rather the combination of several critical factors that will result
Downloaded by University College Cork At 06:17 27 October 2015 (PT)
in its successful outcome. Table I gives an overview of the critical success factors.
They can be divided into two groups:
(1) factors related to the acquisition as process; and
(2) factors related to people within the process.
Planned and structured process
Planning was highly critical to the ERP acquisition process. With there being so many
activities and issues that need to be considered, the odds of having a successful
acquisition will be greatly increased the more care that is taken to do this activity well.
The plan should define from the beginning not only the structure of the process, but
also the techniques that will be used to manage the acquisition process. A well-defined
structure for the acquisition process also presupposes the need for a clear authority.
Also, since many elements need to be accounted for during the acquisition process, it
was noted in each of the cases that if attention and care were given to dealing with
them at the acquisition stage, there would be fewer issues and problems (surprises)
that would arise during the implementation stage.
Critical factors
for successful
acquisitions
671
Rigorous process
Rigor is another factor that defined the acquisition process as the teams carried it out.
If the Acquisition Team was lax in carrying out any part of the acquisition process, the
results were likely to show in the final choice of ERP solution for the organization.
Moreover, since much of the preliminary work that was done during the acquisition
process (i.e. definition of requirements and addressing of issues regarding process
reengineering or redesign, etc.) could be used during the implementation, the more
rigorously the acquisition process was carried out, the better it would become for the
implementation.
Definition of all requirements
It was of critical importance that the Acquisition Team thoroughly assessed and
defined all of the current and desired requirements that were relevant to the packaged
ERP. This meant defining the organization’s needs at all of its different levels and in all
of the functional areas that the ERP would have a direct or indirect impact on. It was
critical that this activity be completed before contacting vendors or doing the
marketplace analysis.
Factors related to the acquisition as process
Factors related to people within this process
Planned and structured process
Rigorous process
Definition of all requirements
Establishment of selection and evaluation criteria
Accurate information
Clear and unambiguous authority
Careful selection of the Acquisition Team members
Partnership approach
User participation
User buy-in
Table I.
Critical success factors
for the ERP acquisition
process
Downloaded by University College Cork At 06:17 27 October 2015 (PT)
JEIM
18,6
Establishment of selection and evaluation criteria
As with the definition of all organizational requirements, it was important and critical
for all three cases that the Team established its selection and evaluation criteria prior
to contacting any vendor or looking at ERP solutions. This was critical to the
determination of the right fit.
672
Accurate information
Since the entire acquisition process was fuelled by information, it was absolutely
imperative that the information was accurate and reliable. Hence, it was necessary that
information sources were verified and crosschecked as to the quality of the information
they provided. While reputation and credibility may speak to the accuracy and
reliability of the information obtained, these also should be double-checked. As was
seen in the case of GAMMA, although one of the consultants that had supplied the
Acquisition Team with information was from a reputable consulting firm, the
consultant’s former ties with one of the ERP vendors biased the information that he
provided to GAMMA Acquisition Team and resulted in GAMMA dropping the vendor
from their long-list. Although GAMMA later chose the ERP from that vendor, the
biased information from that consultant could have resulted in GAMMA settling on
the “wrong” or less than optimal ERP solution for its needs – misinformation could
have been very costly to GAMMA.
Clear and unambiguous authority
Any ambiguity in authority tends to diffuse accountability and increase the possibility
of the process being diverted, or unduly shortened or abbreviated, or of conflict arising
not only on complex issues but on minor ones as well. Hence, a “clear authority” for the
acquisition process stands out as critical for the acquisition process as for the rest of
the process. It appears that this “authority” or “project leader/manager/director” need
not be an individual from the IT department, but should be someone with strong
leadership skills and a good sense of objectivity.
Careful selection of the Acquisition Team members
While the careful selection of team members is critical for any project, it is especially
critical for the acquisition of ERP. Since this type of technological solution is so
complex and diverse in nature, the Acquisition Team needs to be equally diverse in the
skills that are required of its team members. Hence, each individual team member
needs to have the appropriate skills necessary for the completion of specific sets of
tasks or responsibilities within the project. Moreover, each individual team member
needs to be selected to perform a functional and/or advisory role based on his/her
abilities or past experiences.
Partnership approach
Another characteristic of the acquisition process that was also noted as a critical factor
was the “partnership” approach that was adopted by all of the teams with their
vendors of choice. While this approach was also adopted by all of the teams with their
organizations’ user communities, none was more strongly emphasized and evidenced
than by the teams from OMEGA and Keller. OMEGA’s Project Director stated that the
creation of a “partnership approach (internally) with the various user communities,
letting them come up with a recommendation that they felt comfortable with”, led to
the users giving their full buy-in to the acquisition. OMEGA used this approach
similarly with their Purchasing Department. In all of the cases, this approach was used
to establish a more open working relationship with the vendors with the objective of
avoiding conflict situations. The question that was frequently asked by all concerned
was, “Can we work with them?”. In the words of OMEGA’s Project Director:
Downloaded by University College Cork At 06:17 27 October 2015 (PT)
If this is the vendor that you are going to deal with for the next five to ten years, you had
better make sure that you can do business with those people and when it gets tough, that you
can resolve those things.
The element of trust factored into this characteristic and all parties felt the need to
create an atmosphere of trust right from the start of their dealings with the vendors.
User participation
User participation in the acquisition, especially at the vendor demonstrations, was also
considered very important for all of the cases. User participation and user buy-in can
be strongly related. If users participate, they gain a better understanding of the issues
and technologies, and then they can make up their mind and feel part of the acquisition
process (increase their buy-in) and, in return, if they see the ERP as important for the
organization then their participation can increase.
User buy-in
In all of the cases, but especially for OMEGA and Keller, user buy-in was a critical
factor in the success of the acquisition process. User buy-in on the final choice of the
ERP acquisition will undoubtedly result in user acceptance of the software following
implementation. This was evident in the case of Keller. User buy-in of the choice of
technology and even excitement and enthusiasm about its prospects for the
organization usually translated into an open acceptance by the users of the software
following implementation. We might also add that it creates openness to the
technology, which could translate into a shortened learning curve. This would mean
that the organization, as a whole, could derive benefits a lot sooner, i.e. a return to
pre-implementation production levels, or as is hoped with the new ERP, better
production levels. So, there can be several advantages to getting the users involved and
obtaining their buy-in.
We can also note that some of those factors span the whole acquisition process,
when others are more related to one particular stage of the process. More particularly,
during the whole acquisition, the process will need to be rigorous. Even if the “clear
and unambiguous authority”, the “user buy-in” development and maintenance and the
“partnership approach” must be maintained during of all the process, they also appear
as a prerequisite of this process. Without strong leadership manifested by authority,
the complete process will probably not even begin. “User buy-in” and “partnership
approach” are cultural dimensions of the organization and the acquisition process can
reinforce them, but at least the will to create them must be present. We can also notice
that “user buy-in” is crucial for the choice stage and the “participation approach” for
the negotiation stage. The relation of four factors with the first stage, the planning,
Critical factors
for successful
acquisitions
673
JEIM
18,6
Downloaded by University College Cork At 06:17 27 October 2015 (PT)
674
Figure 1.
Relationship between ERP
acquisition process and its
critical success factors
makes this phase one of the most important for the success of the whole process. It is
almost a critical success factor by itself. Finally, “accurate information” will be the
result of a good information search stage and “user participation” is essential during
the evaluation stage. Figure 1 shows the relationship between the stages and the
critical success factors.
Conclusion
The acquisition of ERP systems is a complex task fraught with a high level of risk and
uncertainty. It is important, therefore, to understand which critical factors would lead
to a successful ERP acquisition outcome. This study identified ten factors critical to the
successful outcome of an ERP acquisition. Their omission would have resulted in a less
than optimal outcome for the organization. For each of the three cases, the acquisition
of ERP software was a new experience. Hence, each organization planned and
structured an acquisition process that would provide them with a sense of order,
control, and direction. Omega’s Project Manager, for example, stated that his teams
attributed their project’s success to the fact that the process was very structured and
well planned. In addition, in all three cases, a “partnership” approach was adopted by
the teams (organizations) with the vendors (for a long-term relationship) and,
specifically in the cases of OMEGA and Keller, the user community(ies) within their
organizations. OMEGA’s Project Director stated that the creation of a “partnership
approach (internally) with the various user communities, [let] them come up with a
recommendation that they felt comfortable with”, and led to the users giving their full
buy-in to the acquisition. Thus, user buy-in for both OMEGA and Keller was
considered by each of these organizations to be very important to the successful
outcome of their acquisition process. According to Keller’s Plant Manager, they wanted
to have full user buy-in to ensure the success of the acquisition and hence, they
involved the users early in the process. All in all, in each of the cases, a clear and
unambiguous authority was essential to a successful outcome.
While each CSF is important, it should be noted that no one CSF alone is going to
make an ERP acquisition successful. It is rather the combination of several critical
factors that will result in its successful outcome.
The next phase of research will aim at comparing these critical success factors with
those found in the literature regarding the implementation of ERPs in order to answer
the following questions:
.
Are they comparable?
.
Do they complement each other?
Downloaded by University College Cork At 06:17 27 October 2015 (PT)
An analysis of the CSFs from both areas will lead us to a more integrated view of ERP’s
key management issues and will span ERP’s life cycle from acquisition to
implementation.
References
Akkermans, H. and Van Helden, K. (2002), “Vicious and virtuous cycles in ERP implementation:
a case study of interrelations between critical success factors”, European Journal of
Information Systems, Vol. 11, pp. 35-46.
Al-Mashari, M., Al-Mudimigh, A. and Zairi, M. (2003), “Enterprise resource planning: a taxonomy
of critical factors”, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 146, pp. 352-64.
Appleton, E.L. (1997), “How to survive ERP”, Datamation, Vol. 43 No. 3, pp. 50-3.
Best, C. (1997), “Integrated system built on human foundation”, Computing Canada, Vol. 23
No. 25, p. 54.
Bingi, P., Sharma, M.K. and Godla, J.K. (1999), “Critical issues affecting an ERP implementation”,
Information Systems Management, Summer, pp. 7-14.
Boudreau, M.C. and Robey, D. (1999), “Organizational transition to enterprise resource planning
systems: theoretical choices for process research”, Proceedings ICIS, Charlotte, NC,
pp. 291-9.
Chung, S.H. and Snyder, C.A. (2000), “ERP adoption: a technological evolution approach”,
International Journal of Agile System Management Systems, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 24-30.
Chwen, S., Bongsug, C. and Yang, C.L. (2004), “National differences and ERP implementation:
issues and challenges”, Omega, Vol. 32 No. 5, pp. 361-71.
Davenport, T. (1998), “Putting the enterprise into the enterprise system”, Harvard Business
Review, July-August, pp. 121-31.
Eckhouse, J. (1999), “ERP vendors plot a comeback”, Information Week, No. 718, pp. 126-8.
Esteves, J. and Pastor, J. (2001), “Enterprise resource planning systems research: an annotated
bibliography”, Communications of the AIS, Vol. 7 No. 8, pp. 1-52.
Everdingen, Y., Hillegersberg, J. and Waarts, E. (2000), “ERP adoption by European midsize
companies”, Communications of the ACM, Vol. 43 No. 4, pp. 27-31.
Gibson, J., Holland, C. and Light, B. (1999), “Enterprise resource planning: a business approach to
systems development”, Proceedings of the 32nd Hawaii International Conference on
Science Systems (HICSS), pp. 163-68.
Glover, S.M., Prawitt, D.F. and Romney, M.B. (1999), “Implementing ERP”, Internal Auditor,
Vol. 56 No. 1, pp. 40-7.
Hill, S. Jr (1999), “It just takes work”, Manufacturing Systems, Selecting and Implementing
Enterprise Solutions Supplement, pp. A2-A10.
Critical factors
for successful
acquisitions
675
JEIM
18,6
Downloaded by University College Cork At 06:17 27 October 2015 (PT)
676
Holland, C. and Light, B. (1999), “Critical success factors model for ERP implementation”, IEEE
Software, May/June, pp. 1630-6.
Hong, K-K. and Kim, Y.-G. (2002), “The critical success factors for ERP implementation:
an organizational fit perspective”, Information & Management, Vol. 40, pp. 25-40.
Kerlinger, F.N. (1986), Foundations of Behavioral Research, 3rd ed., Holt Rinehart & Winston,
Chicago, IL.
Koh, C., Soh, C. and Markus, L. (2000), “A process theory approach to analyzing ERP
implementation and impacts: the case of Revel Asia”, Journal of Information Technology
Cases and Applications, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 4-23.
Kumar, K. and Hillegersberg, J. (2000), “ERP experiences and evolution”, Communications of the
ACM, Vol. 43 No. 4, pp. 23-6.
Lee, Z. and Lee, J. (2000), “An ERP implementation case study from a knowledge transfer
perspective”, Journal of Information Technology, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 281-8.
McNurlin, B.C. and Sprague, R.H. Jr (1998), Information Systems Management in Practice, 4th ed.,
Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Markus, M., Tanis, C. and Fenema, P. (2000), “Multisite ERP implementations”, Communications
of the ACM, Vol. 43 No. 4, pp. 42-6.
Miles, M.B. and Huberman, A.M. (1994), Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook,
2nd ed., Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Miranda, R. (1999), “The rise of ERP technology in the public sector”, Government Finance
Review, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 9-17.
Nah, F.F.-H., Lau, J.L.-S. and Kuang, J. (2001), “Critical factors for successful implementation of
enterprise systems”, Business Process Management Journal, Vol. 7 No. 3, pp. 285-96.
PricewaterhouseCoopers (1998), Technology Forecast: 1999, 10th anniversary ed.,
PricewaterhouseCoopers Technology Center, Menlo Park, CA.
Riper, K. and Durham, M.J. (1999), “Phased ERP implementation: the city of Des Moines
experience”, Government Finance Review, pp. 37-42.
Scott, J.E. and Vessey, I. (2000), “Implementing enterprise resource planning systems: the role of
learning from failure”, Information Systems Frontiers, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 213-32.
Soh, C., Kien, S. and Tay-Yap, J. (2000), “Cultural fits and misfits: is ERP a universal solution?”,
Communications of the ACM, Vol. 43 No. 4, pp. 47-51.
Soliman, F., Clegg, S. and Tantoush, T. (2001), “Critical success factors for integration of
CAD/CAM systems with ERP systems”, International Journal of Operations & Production
Management, Vol. 21 Nos 5/6, pp. 609-29.
Stafyla, A. and Stefanou, C.J. (2000), “ERP software selection: a study using cognitive maps”,
Proceedings of the 7th European Conference on Information Technology Evaluation
(ECITE), pp. 293-301.
Sutcliffe, A. (1999), “Towards a theoretical framework for engineering reusable components”,
Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Enterprise Management Resource and
Planning Systems, EMRPS, pp. 103-17.
Verville, J.C. (2000), “An empirical study of organizational buying behavior: a critical
investigation of the acquisition of ‘ERP software’”, dissertation, Universite´ Laval, Que´bec.
Verville, J. and Halingten, A. (2001), Acquiring Enterprise Software: Beating the Vendors at Their
Own Game, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Verville, J. and Halingten, A. (2003a), “The effect of team composition in the ERP acquisition
decisions”, Team Performance Management Journal, Vol. 9 No. 5, pp. 115-30.
Verville, J. and Halingten, A. (2003b), “A six-stage model of the buying process for ERP
software”, Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 32, pp. 585-94.
Yin, R.K. (1989), Case Study Research: Design and Methods, Sage Publications, London.
Downloaded by University College Cork At 06:17 27 October 2015 (PT)
Further reading
Maxwell, J.A. (1996), Qualitative Research Design: An Interactive Approach, Sage Publications,
Thousand Oaks, CA.
(Jacques Verville is currently an Associate Professor of Management of Information Systems in
the College of Business Administration at Texas A&M International University. He holds a PhD
in Organizational Information Systems form the University Laval, Quebec, Canada. He has
authored over 30 publications including conference proceedings papers and articles published in
a number of journals including Industrial Marketing Management, International Journal of
Enterprise Information Systems, International Journal of Technology Management, Journal of
Information Technology Cases and Applications, International Journal of Manufacturing
Technology Management, and International Journal of Qualitative Market Research. Dr Verville
is co-author of Acquiring Enterprise Software: Beating the Vendors at their Own Game.
Christine Bernadas is a Doctoral Candidate in International Business Administration,
concentration in Management Information Systems. Ms Bernadas has a number of articles
published in conference proceedings and journals including the International Journal of
Technology Management, and International Journal of Enterprise Information Systems. Her
current research interest are on ERPs, evaluation and business intelligence.
Alannah Halingten is a Consultant (Halingten-Verville & Associates). She has authored over
ten articles published in a number of journals including Industrial Marketing Management,
International Journal of Enterprise Information Systems, Journal of Information Technology
Cases and Applications, International Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, and
International Journal of Qualitative Market Research. Ms Halingten is co-author of Acquiring
Enterprise Software: Beating the Vendors at their Own Game.)
Critical factors
for successful
acquisitions
677
Downloaded by University College Cork At 06:17 27 October 2015 (PT)
This article has been cited by:
1. Michael Essig, Andreas H. Glas, Josef Gutsmiedl. 2015. Procurement of a supply information system.
Journal of Enterprise Information Management 28:3, 377-399. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
2. Ramaraj Palanisamy, Jacques Verville, Nazim Taskin. 2015. The critical success factors (CSFs) for
Enterprise Software contract negotiations. Journal of Enterprise Information Management 28:1, 34-59.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
3. Huseyin Selcuk Kilic, Selim Zaim, Dursun Delen. 2014. Development of a hybrid methodology for ERP
system selection: The case of Turkish Airlines. Decision Support Systems 66, 82-92. [CrossRef]
4. Placide Poba-Nzaou, Louis Raymond. 2013. Custom Development as an Alternative for ERP Adoption
by SMEs: An Interpretive Case Study. Information Systems Management 30, 319-335. [CrossRef]
5. Payam Hanafizadeh, Ahad Zare Ravasan. 2013. A McKinsey 7S Model-Based Framework for ERP
Readiness Assessment. International Journal of Enterprise Information Systems 7:10.4018/jeis.20111001,
23-63. [CrossRef]
6. Magdy Abdel-Kader, Thu Phuong Nguyen. 2013. An Investigation of Enterprise Resource Planning
Implementation in a Small Firm. International Journal of Enterprise Information Systems 7:10.4018/
jeis.20110101, 18-40. [CrossRef]
7. Benoit Aubert, Pierre-Majorique Léger, Denis Larocque. 2012. Differentiating weak ties and strong
ties among external sources of influences for enterprise resource planning (ERP) adoption. Enterprise
Information Systems 6, 215-235. [CrossRef]
8. Amin Amid, Morteza Moalagh, Ahad Zare Ravasan. 2012. Identification and classification of ERP critical
failure factors in Iranian industries. Information Systems 37, 227-237. [CrossRef]
9. Andrejs Tambovcevs. 2012. ERP system implementation in Latvian manufacturing and construction
company. Technological and Economic Development of Economy 18, 67-83. [CrossRef]
10. Adnéne Hajji, Robert Pellerin, Pierre-Majorique Léger, Ali Gharbi, Gilbert Babin. 2012. Dynamic pricing
models for ERP systems under network externality. International Journal of Production Economics 135,
708-715. [CrossRef]
11. Ramaraj Palanisamy, Jacques Verville, Christine Bernadas, Nazim Taskin. 2010. An empirical study
on the influences on the acquisition of enterprise software decisions. Journal of Enterprise Information
Management 23:5, 610-639. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
12. A. Momoh, R. Roy, E. Shehab. 2010. Challenges in enterprise resource planning implementation: state‐
of‐the‐art. Business Process Management Journal 16:4, 537-565. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
13. S.C.L. Koh, A. Gunasekaran, J.R. Cooper. 2009. The demand for training and consultancy investment in
SME-specific ERP systems implementation and operation. International Journal of Production Economics
122, 241-254. [CrossRef]
14. Haider H. Madani. 2009. The role of internal auditors in ERP‐based organizations. Journal of Accounting
& Organizational Change 5:4, 514-526. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
15. Ömür Y. Saatçıoğlu. 2009. What determines user satisfaction in ERP projects: benefits, barriers or risks?.
Journal of Enterprise Information Management 22:6, 690-708. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
16. Frank Lin, C.E. Tapie Rohm. 2009. Managers' and end‐users' concerns on innovation implementation.
Business Process Management Journal 15:4, 527-547. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
17. Jau‐Rong Chen. 2009. An exploratory study of alignment ERP implementation and organizational
development activities in a newly established firm. Journal of Enterprise Information Management 22:3,
298-316. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
18. Payam Hanafizadeh, Ahad Zare RavasanA McKinsey 7S Model-Based Framework for ERP Readiness
Assessment 141-183. [CrossRef]
Downloaded by University College Cork At 06:17 27 October 2015 (PT)
19. Magdy Abdel-Kader, Thu Phuong NguyenAn Investigation of Enterprise Resource Planning
Implementation in a Small Firm 57-80. [CrossRef]
