Ensuring benefits realisation from ERP II: the CSF phasing model

Abstract

Purpose: Delivering benefits from ERP II is challenging and the purpose of this paper is to investigate the allocation of resources contributing towards benefits realisation. Design/methodology/approach: A case-study investigation was based on a five-month placement within the project team of an organisation implementing ERP II. A critical success factors (CSF) phasing model was developed in order to categorise invested resources. Participant observations formed the first stage of the research and two years post implementation the observations were presented back to four key members of the project team to identify which invested resources contributed towards benefits realisation. Subsequently, the findings were presented to seven supplier organisations to validate the CSFs required to deliver benefits realisation from ERP II implementations. Findings: This research has identified 19 CSFs for ERP II, contributing an additional six to those already outlined in literature. A critical pathway for ERP II implementations has been presented, allowing the identified CSFs to be tackled at the appropriate stages of the implementation. Originality/value: This is the first time CSFs have been allocated to different phases of the implementation lifecycle using a structured model. As a result, resources contributing towards benefits realisation can be more effectively applied, saving the organisation valuable resources. © Emerald Group Publishing Limited

Critical Success Factors for Integrated Library System Implementation in Academic Libraries: A Qualitative Study

“…The project champion must have people-related skills and position to introduce changes in achieving buy-in from staff users. 54,55…”

Understanding algorithm bias in artificial intelligence-enabled ERP software customization

“…We are aware of and grateful for the research on business information systems, specifically ERP that has been done. These studies have proposed conceptual frameworks for thinking about customization from the perspective of benefits realization and methods for both qualitatively and quantitatively estimating the benefits of customization (Luo and Strong, 2004; Ashurst et al , 2008; Parthasarathy, 2008; Rothenberger and Srite, 2009; Staehr, 2010; Daneva and Wieringa, 2010; Aslam et al , 2012; Eckarz et al , 2012; Norton et al , 2013; Doherty, 2014; Parthasarathy and Daneva, 2014; Parthasarathy and Sharma, 2014; Parthasarathy and Daneva, 2016; Parthasarathy and Sharma, 2016; Parthasarathy and Sharma, 2017; Ibrahim et al , 2019; Parthasarathy et al , 2020; Mahmood et al , 2020; Febrianto and Soediantono, 2022; Yathiraju, 2022; Yoo and Kim, 2021; Wang et al , 2022).…”

An approach to estimation of degree of customization for ERP projects using prioritized requirements

“…Dörr et al, 2008;Leitner and Kreiner, 2010;Torkar et al, 2012 ), (2) project effort and cost estimation (e.g. Rosa et al, 2013 ), and (3) IT and ERP benefits realization perspective ( Ashurst et al, 2008;Staehr, 2010;Aslam et al, 2012;Norton et al, 2013;Doherty, 2014 ).…”

“…Scholars in the field of business information systems in general, and ERP in particular, proposed conceptual frameworks for reasoning about customization from benefits realization perspective and also approaches to qualitatively and quantitatively estimating customization benefits, as e.g. in ( Ashurst et al, 2008;Staehr, 2010;Aslam et al, 2012;Eckartz, 2012;Norton et al, 2013;Doherty, 2014 ). Most of the published studies in the area of IT/IS/ERP benefits realization use as their theoretical foundation: (1) the benefits dependency network of Ward and Daniel (2006) which links highlevel investment goals that are associated with every large scale IT project (be it ERP or non-ERP), or (2) the resource-based view that is focused on how organizations could increase the likelihood that their IS/IT investments' projected benefits will ultimately be realized ( Ashurst et al, 2008 ).…”

“…Our research is motivated by the observation that overcustomization remains an unresolved problem ( Rothenberger and Srite, 2009;Norton et al, 2013 ) despite the fact that most businesses are aware of the issues associated with it and today there are well-documented case studies on customization in various business contexts. To the best of our knowledge, no systematic approach has been published until now on how to prioritize customization requirements and use these requirements to estimate the degree of customization in quantitative terms.…”