The Other Side of Success Factors—A Systemic Methodology for Exploring Critical Success Factors

Abstract

This paper puts forward a systemic methodology to explore Critical Success Factors (CSFs). The common idea about ranking CSFs is to explore the relationship of 'more important', i.e. directly assessing whether success factor A is more important than factor B. This idea is prominent in the prevailing approaches, e.g. the qualitative inquiry, quantitative analysis, and multi-criteria decision making. Exploring CSFs from a different lens, this paper argues for systemic approaches, reckoning that manifold interrelationships could exist between system elements. Considering the manifold interrelationships, the proposed methodology contends that two opposite interrelationships could exist between CSFs-'helping to achieve' and 'inhibiting to achieve'. The first step of assessing CSFs is to construct a digraph in a participatory way, showing the transitive 'helping to achieve' relationship between CSFs and obtain the 'helping to achieve' score for each element. The second step is to examine the inhibiting relationship through a pairwise comparison to obtain the 'inhibiting to achieve' score for each element. The third step is to combine the 'helping to achieve score' with 'inhibiting to achieve' score to obtain the net score for each success factor. This output aims to provide the relevant stakeholders with a more comprehensive spectrum in assessing CSFs to develop their organizations well.

Key Factors to Increasing Free Cash Flow for Manufacturers Utilizing Lean Production: An AHP-DEMATEL Approach

“…(5) In dimension "C5", "Strategic deployment (C51)" is the most important evaluation criterion. Daniel (1961) argues that most companies have two to six factors that determine their success (Tuan, 2021), if a company wants to be successful, it must strive for excellence in these factors. We assume that the weight of the key assessment criteria must be greater than the average weight of all assessment criteria (1/15 or 0.0667) to be selected as a meaningful key indicator.…”

“…If a company is to be successful, it must do a particularly good job with these factors (Tuan, 2021). In the AHP study, among the eight key criteria, the first two indicators, Strategic Planning and Strategic Deployment have a weighting of nearly 0.1 and above, indicating that the first two are particularly important in the decision to grow free cash flow.…”

Factors That Impact the Dynamics and Effectiveness of Work Teams during the Implementation of Continuous Improvement Tools in the Manufacturing Industry: A Systematic Literature Review

“…The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https: //www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/app14031017/s1. References [10,24,30,31,[44][45][46][47][48][49][50][51] are cited in Supplementary Materials part.…”

Driving Efficiency and Competitiveness: Trends and Innovations in ERP Systems for the Wood Industry

“…They are endangering the organization's core activity because of a low and challenging understanding of the benefits of a new ERP software, and Hong et al [12], also highlighted an unusually high failure rate. Numerous studies [13][14][15][16][17][18][19] have demonstrated that measuring implementation success can involve both business and project success. The success of an ERP project implementation is measured by whether the ERP system is delivered on time, on budget, and meets the specified goal.…”

“…CSFs are pivotal factors or areas in business that, when executed exceptionally well, empower an organization to achieve success and prosperity. These factors constitute critical elements essential for outstanding organizational performance in reaching its goals [16][17][18]. However, concerning CSFs in IT implementation, Rockart [19] pioneered a research method explicitly designed to elicit CSFs.…”