International Journal of Accounting & Information Management

An integrated framework for ERP system implementation

Kalinga Jagoda, Premaratne Samaranayake,
Article information:
To cite this document:
Kalinga Jagoda, Premaratne Samaranayake, (2017) "An integrated framework for ERP system
implementation", International Journal of Accounting & Information Management, Vol. 25 Issue: 1,
pp.91-109, https://doi.org/10.1108/IJAIM-04-2016-0038
Permanent link to this document:
https://doi.org/10.1108/IJAIM-04-2016-0038
Downloaded by Sheffield Hallam University At 06:36 14 May 2019 (PT)

Downloaded on: 14 May 2019, At: 06:36 (PT)

References: this document contains references to 70 other documents.
To copy this document: [email protected]
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 4511 times since 2017*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
(2011),"Factors affecting ERP system implementation effectiveness", Journal
of Enterprise Information Management, Vol. 25 Iss 1 pp. 60-78 <a href="https://
doi.org/10.1108/17410391211192161">https://doi.org/10.1108/17410391211192161</a>
(2016),"Centralization and the success of ERP implementation", Journal of Enterprise Information
Management, Vol. 29 Iss 5 pp. 728-750 <a href="https://doi.org/10.1108/JEIM-07-2015-0058">https://
doi.org/10.1108/JEIM-07-2015-0058</a>

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by All users group
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 current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/1834-7649.htm

An integrated framework for ERP implementation

ERP system

system implementation
Kalinga Jagoda
University of Guleph, Guelph, Canada, and
91
Premaratne Samaranayake
School of Business, Western Sydney University, Penrith, Australia Received 18 April 2016
Revised 12 July 2016
Accepted 23 August 2016

Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to propose an alternative integrated approach based on the
Downloaded by Sheffield Hallam University At 06:36 14 May 2019 (PT)

stage-gate method to implement enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems which will enhance the
effectiveness of ERP projects.
Design/methodology/approach – A literature review was conducted on ERP system implementation
and its effectiveness. The need for improving implementation approaches and methodologies was examined.
Based on the insights gained, a conceptual framework for ERP system implementation is presented by
combining the state-gate approach with the pre-implementation roadmap.
Findings – The proposed framework aims to enhance the overall ERP implementation outcomes, ensuring
critical success factors and eliminating common causes of failures. A pre-implementation roadmap is
identified as a key element for eliminating many causes of failure including lack of organisations’ readiness for
ERP. The post-implementation stage can be used for further improvements to the system through internal
research and development.
Research limitations/implications – The development of the framework is an attempt to contribute to
improving ERP implementation. This research is expected to motivate researchers to work in this area, and it
will be beneficial to practicing managers in the identification of opportunities for improvements in ERP
systems. Case studies will be valuable to refine and validate the proposed model.
Originality/value – This paper explores research in a needy area and offers a framework to help
researchers and practitioners in improving ERP implementation. This framework is expected to reduce the
implementation project duration, strengthen critical success factors and minimise common problems of ERP
implementation projects.
Keywords ERP implementation, Implementation cycle, Selection methods, System options
Paper type Research paper

Introduction
Over the past two decades, many organisations have implemented enterprise resource
planning (ERP) systems across a range of industries for various reasons and motivations
with a view to re-engineering business processes at the operational level. ERP systems are
business software packages that enable organisations to:
• integrate their business functions (sales, production, human resources, finances,
purchasing, etc.);
• share common data, information and knowledge throughout the entire enterprise;
• automate critical parts of its business processes; and International Journal of
Accounting & Information
• generate and access information in real-time environment using a single database. Management
Vol. 25 No. 1, 2017
pp. 91-109
Because these systems are complex and require significant investment of capital and © Emerald Publishing Limited
1834-7649
time, effective adoption of such ERP systems is becoming more important than ever DOI 10.1108/IJAIM-04-2016-0038
 IJAIM before. However, earlier adoption of ERP systems has resulted in many failures,
25,1 including failure to be fully implemented (Gargeya and Brady, 2005). Thus, there
seems to be a strong need for enhancing current implementation practices for better
outcomes.
The literature suggests that many ERP projects have not produced the desired results for
a variety of reasons (Gargeya and Brady, 2005; Momoh et al., 2010). Thus, there is a strong
92 need for enhancing the effectiveness of ERP projects while being fully aware of problems,
shortcomings and their resolutions. Enhancements can be two-fold, namely, improvements
to the implementation cycle itself and incorporation of certain pre-implementation activities
as part of overall roadmap, which many projects have overlooked in the past.
Abdinnour-Helm et al. (2003) concluded from a survey that the level of involvement in
pre-implementation training with consultants appeared to have little influence on attitudes
towards ERP. However, there are many pre-implementation activities which have not been
considered in the past and are potential candidates for further investigation for better ERP
Downloaded by Sheffield Hallam University At 06:36 14 May 2019 (PT)

implementation outcomes.
In this paper, an alternative approach to the current implementation cycle is
proposed. The new approach is based on the stage-gate method, which has been
successfully used for planning and implementing technology transfer projects. The
stage-gate approach is extended by incorporating both pre-implementation and
post-implementation activities. In the proposed approach, a pre-implementation
roadmap substitutes the first two stages of the stage-gate model. Furthermore, key
activities of pre-implementation stage are represented by an analytical hierarchy
process (AHP) model, taking relative importance of key activities into consideration.
Other stages are modified according to the requirements of ERP implementation and
issues associated with current practices.
The reminder of the paper is structured as follows. First, it provides an overview of
ERP implementation aspects including common practices, issues and success and failure
factors. The stage-gate model is outlined next, with details of each stage and gate and
how each stage links with pre-implementation and post-implementation stages. Next,
possible deployment of IT in ERP implementation from a technology transfer
perspective is discussed. Finally, the paper concludes with findings and future
directions.

Overview of enterprise resource planning implementation aspects

ERP systems can bring substantial value for the firm through best business practices,
delivered through various functional applications supported by comprehensive process and
data integration (Koh et al., 2011). While recognising complexities of ERP system
implementation projects, effective implementation can enhance the firm performance (Sense
and Kiridena, 2014). Furthermore, recent studies have pointed out that knowledge sharing
plays a mediating role linking information systems maturity and firm performance (Rao
et al., 2015). It can enhance the business value by increasing investor confidence (Ajit et al.,
2014), return-on-assets and return-on-investment, increasing technological competence
(Galy and Sauceda, 2014). However, the implementation and adoption of ERP systems across
many industries and organisations have resulted in both failures and successes.
Implementation of ERP systems in organisational settings has been a topic of research and
discussion among many practitioners and researchers (Hwang et al., 2015; Tsai et al., 2011;
Peslak, 2006; Sharma et al., 2006; Gargeya and Brady, 2005; Stijn and Wensley, 2001). Many
have identified causes of failures, critical issues, critical success factors and areas of
improvements in the recent past (Gajic et al., 2014; Al-Mashari and Zairi, 2000;
 Amoako-Gyampah, 2004; Ettlie et al., 2005; Kim et al., 2005; Loh and Koh, 2004; Muscatello ERP system
et al., 2003; Xu et al., 2002; Al-Mashari et al., 2006). Some have even proposed various implementation
implementation approaches, methodologies and frameworks for ERP implementations
(Norton et al., 2013; Metaxiotis et al., 2005; Schniederjans and Kim, 2003; Chakraborty and
Sharma, 2007).
Davenport (2000) describes the major elements of a rational approach to implementing an
ERP system. Preparation of people and technical system are two key parts of this approach.
Organisations face similar challenges in implementing ERP systems irrespective of
93
whether it is a total ERP system or selected modules of an ERP system. Implementation has
been identified as a key of the ERP projects, compared to development as a key for traditional
software development (Sandoe et al., 2001). Implementation itself consists of six phases from
initiation to full scale operations (go-live) and initiation plays a significant role in ERP
system implementations, especially in the pre-implementation stage (Sandoe et al., 2001;
Downloaded by Sheffield Hallam University At 06:36 14 May 2019 (PT)

Sumner, 2005). Furthermore, Kale (2000) argues that the implementation cycle can be
strengthened by incorporating two aspects, namely, ERP evaluation and selection of the
right ERP system for organisational requirements.
Successes and failures of ERP system implementations have been widely cited in the
literature, including the high failure rate (Davenport, 2000; Kim et al., 2005). Kim et al. (2005)
reviews a number of previous implementation projects and concludes that most critical success
factors are related to functional coordination problems. Nah et al. (2001), through a thorough
literature review, identified 11 critical success factors including well-established factors such as
top management support (MS): Muscatello et al. (2003) based on multiple case studies show that
effective executive management is a key success factor for small- and medium-sized enterprises
to achieve success in ERP implementation. Abdinnour-Helm et al. (2003) conclude from their
preliminary studies that employee attitudes are a key factor in determining ERP implementation
success or failure. Gargeya and Brady (2005) identify the lack of appropriate culture and
organisational (internal) readiness as the most important factor contributing to failure of ERP
implementation in 15 companies they studied.
Although ERP implementation is considered to be the largest investment in IT
(Davenport, 2000; Huang et al., 2004), treating ERP implementation projects as IT only
projects has caused many failures, costing many organisations millions of dollars in lost
revenue and in some cases even bankruptcy. While ERP systems are supported by new IT,
database and communication technologies, they are not IT systems rather they are
application systems (Samaranayake, 2009). Therefore, to increase the level of success, project
teams should consist of not only IT personnel of the organisation but also business and
management personnel.
The high failure rate of ERP implementation has made a strong case for a better
understanding of critical success factors (Zach et al., 2014; Zach and Bjorn, 2012; Somers
et al., 2000). Among many critical success factors, business process reengineering and
establishing a total quality management culture have identified as key approaches that play
important roles in ERP implementation (Hsu et al., 2015; Schniederjans and Kim, 2003).
Furthermore, the need for better implementation of ERP systems has led to the focus on
improving implementation approaches and methodologies. Metaxiotis et al. (2005) have
argued that implementation cost and time are reduced, and adoption of the processes makes
implementation easier by using goal directed project management (PM) methodology.
Research on the critical success factors and causes of failure for initial and ongoing ERP
implementation cases is limited and fragmented (Zach and Bjorn, 2012; Nah and Lau, 2001).
Harwood (2003) argues that the problems tend not to be with the technology but with the
people. The notion of “people issues” as significant is endorsed by Monk and Wagner (2006)
 IJAIM who states that most challenges to ERP implementation involve managing personnel and
25,1 their reactions to change rather than managing technical issues. Most of the critical success
factors, issues and causes for failure identified in these studies can be addressed and/or
linked to one of the phases of the implementation cycle. For example, effective change
management is a critical success factor for many ERP implementations when dealing with a
lot of changes, in particular “people issues” as a result of behavioural changes. Thus, change
94 management has become part of the implementation cycle. Furthermore, Xu et al. (2002)
identify data quality as one of the critical issues during the implementation of an ERP
system. Stijn and Wensley (2001) argue that process knowledge is an issue where it is either
lost or represented in different ways in different parts of the organisation. Because most of
these issues are associated with phases of the implementation cycle, implementations can be
improved by addressing these issues within the implementation cycle. However, the lack of
readiness assessment, identified as one of the key failure factors (Samaranayake, 2005) over
Downloaded by Sheffield Hallam University At 06:36 14 May 2019 (PT)

many implementation projects, cannot be addressed within implementation phases because

it is outside the current implementation cycle. This means readiness assessment needs to be
looked at as part of pre-implementation and should be linked with the implementation cycle
at appropriate times for better implementation outcomes.
Implementation of information technology projects such as ERP system has been a
challenge for companies. Many researchers pointed out that the success of implementation
depends upon the available resources and how those resources are mobilised to support the
implementation (Barney, 1991; Sirmon et al., 2007; Ferguson and Seow, 2011). In their study
of small accounting firm, Pan et al. (2014) found that collective leadership and managing
change are instrumental in enriching resources in the IT capability development process,
whereas effective governance structure, extensive IT knowledge and business experience
and stakeholder commitment play a supporting role.
Research on many aspects of ERP projects are either narrowly focused on a particular
industry/perspective or considers only part of the implementation phase. Looking at a
broader perspective of the implementation cycle, Samaranayake (2006) proposed an
alternative to the implementation cycle through not only improvement to phases within the
current implementation cycle, including implementation methodology, but also
enhancement of the whole implementation cycle by incorporating pre-implementation and
post-implementation activities. However, an integrated approach for ERP system
implementation, providing a decision-making process with assurance of critical success
factors at each stage is still lacking.
It is important to note that many critical success factors are either part of the
implementation cycle or linked directly to the implementation, whereas causes of failure
are mainly outside the implementation cycle. Furthermore, careful analysis of causes of
failure indicates that main failure causes are lack of organisations’ readiness and
weaknesses of the implementation cycle itself. This strengthens a case for organisations
to be involved in the pre-implementation stage, supported by an enhanced
implementation cycle if organisations were to eliminate the main causes of
implementation failures. This is because an ERP system implementation cycle does not
evaluate the organisation’s readiness for an ERP and bypasses the feasibility study,
along with other associated activities, such as readiness assessment, system options and
selection methods. Furthermore, the implementation cycle itself lacks evaluation and
monitoring of progress during the implementation. Therefore, it is expected that
outcomes of ERP system implementation be enhanced through the stage-gate approach,
where pre-implementation activities are incorporated at the respective stage and
evaluated for making decisions at the gate before going to the next stage. Thus, this
 research focuses on integrating the pre-implementation stage with the stage-gate model ERP system
for the implementation cycle. implementation
Stage-gate model for enterprise resource planning implementation
The stage-gate model was developed based on the earlier work by Jagoda and Ramanathan
(2005). The stage-gate model essentially delineates a complex process into a set of
predetermined stages and gates. The stages are made up of prescribed tasks with 95
cross-functional and simultaneous activities. The gate or controlling point is at the entrance
to each stage. These checkpoints usually give go/kill/hold/recycle signals to the transfer
process (Jagoda and Ramanathan, 2005). At every stage and gate the project team exchanges
information with its environment. The stage-gate model for ERP implementation constitutes
three levels of stage-gate models, where the pre-implementation roadmap, implementation
cycle and post-implementation are represented by respective stages and gates relevant to
Downloaded by Sheffield Hallam University At 06:36 14 May 2019 (PT)

ERP implementation. The schematic view of such a stage-gate model for an ERP system
implementation is shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1 shows the complete stage-gate model for the ERP system implementation,
incorporating a pre-implementation roadmap, implementation cycle and post-implementation
stage. Depending on the priorities of the firm (ERP system requirements vs cost-benefit analysis),
this stage can be initiated with system options or selection methods. Thus, the
pre-implementation roadmap is incorporated into the model as a very specific stage-gate.
Furthermore, both implementation cycle and post-implementation stage consist of appropriate
stages and gates as shown in Figure 1. Apart from stages and gates, there are also loops within
the implementation cycle for enhancing the stages involved based on the status of gates.
This stage-gate model presents an integrated approach to the planning and execution of ERP
system implementation projects. According to the requirements and competitive landscape of the
firm, some stages and gates may be implemented in a short period. The scope and extent of the
activities within these stages could change, depending on the nature of the technology involved
and could be considered in terms of complexity, cost and other external factors. It is possible to
implement the first two stages of the pre-implementation roadmap simultaneously; however,
those two stages have to be completed before proceeding to the ERP readiness assessment. In the
implementation cycle, firms need to follow the stage-gate sequence as indicated in the model. The
post-implementation stage evaluates the impact of the ERP system and acts as the platform for
the further refinement and/or maintenance and upgrade of the existing ERP system. It should
also be noted that it is not necessary to implement the ERP system in all departments or all
functional areas (i.e. marketing, production, human resources, etc.); rather, it can be implemented
by individual modules using a phase approach.
It is noted from applications of stage-gate approach across many technology transfer-related
projects that the approach can be further improved through careful analysis of the requirements
and competitive landscape of the firm (Vieira Junior et al., 2014; Jagoda et al., 2010). Because
requirements are fulfilled through various activities in each stage and the competitive landscape
of the firm influences the decision maker on the choice at each gate, the need for further refinement
of the stage-gate approach is sought. In this regard, it is important to recognise the importance of
different weights of activities at each stage, given requirements are not equally important when
evaluating criteria for decision-making. To allow for this, activities in selected stages of the
proposed approach are evaluated using AHP. The AHP is a multicriteria decision-making
approach in which decision criteria are weighted and arranged in a hierarchical structure for
making a decision through evaluation of criteria (Saaty, 1990). The AHP considers the relative
weight of each criterion/activity at each stage. Based on relative weights of criteria/activities at
 Downloaded by Sheffield Hallam University At 06:36 14 May 2019 (PT)

96
25,1
IJAIM

Figure 1.

implementation
for ERP system
Stage-gate approach
Cost-Benefit
System options Analysis

ERP readiness Readiness

assessment Index

Selection System
methods Requirements

Pre-implementation Road Map

Partner Preparing an
Approving Implementing
Selection Fianlising ERP System Implementation
implementation the ERP
and Agreement implementation Audit
plan System
Negotiation plan

Implementation Cycle

Developing Guidelines ERP System Impact

for Post-Implementation Assessment
Activities

Post-Implementation
 each stage, a weighted index is evaluated for making a decision at each gate. The enhanced ERP system
stage-gate approach is outlined by incorporating relevant AHP models at selected stages of the implementation
implementation cycle.

Pre-implementation roadmap
The pre-implementation roadmap consists of three main components: system options,
selection methods and ERP readiness assessment (Olson, 2004; Samaranayake, 2006). These 97
components support each other through links among them, as shown in Figure 1. System
options are based on cost-benefit analysis and can provide the best option for initiation of the
project within the implementation. Furthermore, selection methods are based on system
requirements, whereas readiness assessment is based on selection criteria. Selection criteria
can be used to measure the readiness as a percentage for a combination of selected ERP
systems with system options.
Downloaded by Sheffield Hallam University At 06:36 14 May 2019 (PT)

Olson (2004) discusses various system options available for ERP implementation. Those
system options include full implementation (FI) of vendor product, partial implementation
(PI) of vendor product, minimal implementation (MI) of vendor product, in-house
development (ID) and do nothing (DN). In other words, system options are mainly based on
the cost-benefit over a selected period of return rather than ERP system requirements of the
organisation. However, the decision on system options can correctly be made if the selection
methods based on requirements are evaluated prior to the system options. Also, there can be
further enhancements if ERP evaluation is carried out for evaluating different ERP vendors
based on three main areas: technical capabilities, operational flexibilities and financial
viabilities. Therefore, system options can be incorporated into the stage-gate model where
options available are considered in the gate, whereas the decision on the system is considered
as the gate for the next stage.
Selection methods are similar to system options but choices in the selection methods are
based on requirements and usually consist of a number of options because of the nature of the
ERP system’s landscape. Main options available for selection methods vary from “develop
in-house” to “access to an ERP system through an application service provider (ASP) mode”.
Because selection methods are based on requirements rather than cost-benefit analysis, the
options available in this process are much more than that in system options. Apart from
having a full or partial system in the site, it is also possible to have access to what the
organisation needs from an external ASP. Similar to system options, selection methods can
also be incorporated into the stage-gate model through appropriate stage(s) and gate(s).
ERP readiness assessment is the major part of the pre-implementation roadmap
(Samaranayake, 2006). Readiness assessment can be seen as a key for eliminating the main
cause of many failures: not knowing the organisation’s readiness before embarking on a
large or small ERP system implementation project. It also directly links with a number of
assessment bases, where each base has a number of characteristics linking with critical
success factors. Depending on the assessment basis and the individual characteristics,
readiness assessment can take a different score through different weights and ratings on
various aspects of the implementation.
Thus, these three components of pre-implementation roadmap can be incorporated into
the overall stage-gate model using appropriate stage or gate at each component. To allow for
relative importance of each criterion/activity at the pre-implementation stage, enhanced
stage-gate model is proposed, by adopting AHP for both system options and readiness
assessment stages, where requirements and benefits are considered for making a decision at
respective gate. The proposed AHP model with key criteria and sub-criteria comprising of
alternatives is shown in Figure 2. Furthermore, the overall pre-implementation roadmap can
 IJAIM also be connected to the implementation cycle with appropriate relations between them. To
25,1 plan and execute activities within the pre-implementation roadmap as part of the stage-gate
model, the organisation needs to establish an ERP Implementation Steering Committee
(EISC). It is expected that EISC is involved in activities throughout the implementation
including the post-implementation. If necessary, EISC can be expanded by incorporating
process and technical experts.
98 The decision structure shown in Figure 2 involves a single hierarchy with two criteria
(requirements and cost/benefit analysis) and five decision alternatives (FI, PI, MI, ID and
DN). Depending on the competitive landscape of the firm, the organisation can rank relative
importance of two criteria. Once the relative importance of each criterion is identified, the
organisation can rank each alternative from a standpoint of requirements and cost/benefit
analysis. Once the above ranking is set, ranking of each alternative using composite weight
can be evaluated for the final decision on system option. Numerical evaluation of the
proposed AHP is not provided because it is beyond the scope of the research presented here.
Downloaded by Sheffield Hallam University At 06:36 14 May 2019 (PT)

Similar to the AHP approach for system options stage, readiness assessment can also be
considered with a hierarchical decision structure so that the overall pre-implementation
stage can be improved. In this case, the decision structure comprises two criteria
(requirements and failure/risk analysis) and five alternatives (improvement projects [IP],
process-oriented organisation, MS, infrastructure support and PM experience). These five
alternatives are considered from a point of prior experience rather than decision variables.
For example, prior experience of IP such as business re-engineering can be vital in
implementing a brand new ERP system, and therefore its importance can be considered at
high level. The resulting hierarchical structure of two criteria and five alternatives is shown
in Figure 3.
Depending on the level of requirements and competitive landscape of the firm, the relative
importance of requirements and failure/risk analysis can be decided. Careful analysis of prior

Figure 2.
Hierarchical structure
of system options

Figure 3.
Hierarchical structure
of readiness
assessment
 experience of each alternative and its relevance to the level of implementation preferred, ERP system
relative importance of each alternative can be decided. Once relative importance of implementation
individual alternatives and criteria are set, ranking of each alternative using composite
weight can be evaluated for the final decision on readiness assessment as part of overall
pre-implementation stage and subsequent decision at the gate.

Implementation cycle 99
The implementation cycle consists of three stages: partner selection and negotiation,
preparation of an ERP system implementation plan and implementation of the ERP system.
Three gates – finalising agreement, approving implementation plan and implementation
audit – follow the stages. These components follow the stage-gate approach as shown in
Figure 1. At each stage, prescribed and mandatory activities are done, and, at the gate,
decision is taken to go/no-go/hold or recycles. If the activities are not carried out
Downloaded by Sheffield Hallam University At 06:36 14 May 2019 (PT)

satisfactorily at the stage, EISC will take decisions at the gate to revisit the activities at the
stage.
Partner selection and negotiation is a critical stage, where the EISC selects and negotiates
with the potential ERP system vendors, hardware vendors and implementation partners.
Based on the recommendations made in the pre-implementation cycle, a clear set of
specifications must first be developed for the ERP system and hardware being sought. Based
on these specifications, EISC develops a shortlist of potential vendors and partners that can
deliver the required ERP system and its implementation. If the negotiations with the first
vendor do not lead to a satisfactory outcome, then the EISC may move to the next. The
outcomes of this stage will significantly determine how the ERP project will proceed and
under what conditions. Furthermore, the terms agreed upon can have far reaching
implications for all parties.
Traditionally, ERP system and associated technology negotiations have been adversarial
in nature, but, in a globalised setting, a “win-win” approach based on trust and
understanding are likely to produce better outcomes. The main activities in this stage are the
following:
• developing a preferred vendor profile, focusing on desired ERP functional capabilities,
experience in ERP projects, business strategy, past performance and cross-cultural
expertise;
• developing a list of firms that are capable of providing the desired ERP system,
initiating communication and gathering information in accordance with the vendor
profile criteria;
• agreeing upon a basis for the evaluation of the ERP system and components and
reaching agreement on issues related to payments and intellectual property protection;
• reaching agreement on each party’s contribution and responsibilities towards the ERP
project;
• reaching agreement on issues and methods related to the knowledge transfer methods
including training and documentation;
• establishing effective channels of communication among all parties;
• reaching agreement upon payment amounts, procedures, and time-frames; and
• preparing a detailed ERP system implementation agreement based on the outcomes of
the above-mentioned activities.
 IJAIM The finalising agreement gate is initiated once the EISC has reached an agreement with an
25,1 ERP vendor and other parties. Once all parties have expressed the desire to finalise the ERP
system implementation, EISC, with the consultation of all parties, draws up a legal
agreement. Even in its simplest form, such an agreement should contain the exact identity of
the parties involved, subject matter of the implementation, protection of intellectual
property, the scope of implementation, payment structure, vendor’s obligations, system
100 users’ obligations and obligations common to all parties.
At the beginning of the stage, preparing an ERP system implementation plan, a vendor
for the ERP system would have been chosen. This stage is based on the premise that the
creation of a sound organisational infrastructure is critical to the implementation of an ERP
system. The activities during this stage are aimed at preparing the user organisation to
receive the new system and include the following:
• identifying changes to be made to the organisational structure and work design based
Downloaded by Sheffield Hallam University At 06:36 14 May 2019 (PT)

on an understanding of the ERP functional components;

• identifying changes to be made in the knowledge management system and policy
regimes to accommodate the new ERP system;
• developing pragmatic training and education schedules for the workforce that
matches with the functional components to be implemented;
• formulating measures to build good relationships between the ERP vendor personnel
and consulting partner;
• formulating a realistic ERP project implementation plan that can form the basis of a
working relationship between the ERP vendor and the user; and
• reaching agreement upon milestones to help strengthen PM and control.

At the approving the implementation plan gate, top management will carefully evaluate the
project schedule and may suggest refinements to the EISC. Specific areas that may be
carefully scrutinised are adequacy of training, validity of the suggestions made for the
modification of the organisational infrastructure, adequacy of intellectual property
protection measures, durations of critical activities, sufficiency of quality assurance
procedures and affordability of payment schedules. If these are satisfactory, then a go-ahead
signal may be given. Top management may also approve an initial payment to the vendor if
such a payment has been specified in the agreement.
ERP system implementation requires rigorous PM practices because of the size and
complexities involved. Training is a key area throughout the implementation and must
proceed without delay. Furthermore, the timely arrival of all software, hardware and
consulting services is essential to ensure go-live as planned. Based on traditional
implementation activities (Sandoe et al., 2001), the following activities have been identified as
critical and important for the success of ERP system implementation projects:
• identifying configuration changes to be made to the system to suit local business
conditions and making the necessary adaptations;
• recruiting skilled personnel not already available within the organisation and
conducting training programs for existing staff;
• developing an improved remuneration plan to facilitate change management;
• formulating arrangements with ancillary vendors of software and hardware
components and services based on in-house or out-sourced decision; and
• go-live the ERP system on or before schedule.
 Implementation audit gate is aimed at gaining an understanding of barriers to the successful ERP system
implementation of ERP systems. Top management may set up an internal audit committee implementation
or an external auditor to compile an audit report outlining lessons learned. The report may
focus on the implementation experience with respect to critical success factors such as
commitment displayed by both the user and the vendor, conflicts experienced, maintenance
of time-frame integrity, costs incurred, quality achieved, extent of learning and skill
upgrading, new knowledge generated and communication effectiveness.
101
Post-implementation stage
This stage is incorporated as part of the complete model for overall ERP system
implementation methodology. This is largely outside the main activity of the ERP system
implementation, where tasks are limited to system maintenance, system upgrades and
database backups. Planning such activities can be incorporated into the only stage
Downloaded by Sheffield Hallam University At 06:36 14 May 2019 (PT)

associated with this activity. Assessing the impact of an ERP project is difficult because it is
a complex process with multiple outcomes that could emerge throughout the life of a project.
Also, the intangible benefits of an ERP project are difficult to evaluate. It would be prudent
to use a balanced scorecard approach to assess the impacts of an ERP project from financial,
technological and organisational perspectives (Chand et al., 2005).
The following activities may be carried out at this stage:
• assessing the actual outcomes of the ERP project from financial, technological and
organisational perspectives;
• identifying variances (if applicable) between actual and expected outcomes and the
reasons for the variances;
• evaluating the adequacy of corrective measures that were implemented to correct
adverse variances;
• examining the feasibility of improving the ERP system functionality; and
• identifying new or complementary systems such as supply chain management (SCM)
and customer relationship management (CRM) that could be incorporated into the
current solution.

Completion of all of the above activities reaches the post-implementation gate. At this gate,
important decisions have to be made as to whether to continue to use the ERP system by
adding other functionalities incrementally or go for ERP system upgrades. A successful ERP
project could lead to a strong relationship between the partners and new projects could be
initiated. In such a situation, guidelines may be formulated by top management in
consultation with the EISC for postimplementation activities such as global roll-out of the
phase of implementation, adding complementary applications (SCM, CRM, etc.), improving
the system through internal research and development, or using a mix of all in partnership
with the ERP vendor.

Deployment of information technology in enterprise resource planning

implementation
It was noted in the literature that most of ERP implementation failures were caused by treating
ERP systems as IT systems and limiting the scope of IT PM (Peslak, 2006; Velcu, 2007). By
contrast, ERP systems are much more than IT systems, and, therefore, successful
implementation of an ERP system requires broader IT involvement (Robey et al., 2006). This
means that ERP system implementations require deployment of many IT tools and techniques.
Because the proposed approach for ERP implementation is supported by a stage-gate model,
 IJAIM which is a technology transfer approach, IT deployment is considered to be core element of
25,1 overall implementation project. Irrespective of the size (small or large ERP implementation), IT
plays a major role in planning and executing the activities involved.
Earlier work by Davenport (2000) identified a number of opportunities for using IT in
various projects within organisational contexts, including technology transfer. Many of
those impacts can be used advantageously in planning and implementing an ERP
102 system. A major concern in many ERP projects is the cost involved in implementing such
a system across the entire organisation. Both software and hardware vendors, and users
of ERP system, are interested in finding approaches to reduce the overall costs.
Another reason for the interest in IT deployment for ERP implementation is that many
ERP projects take considerable time to complete. The shortening of life cycles and frequent
changes in the marketplace have made it imperative for the user and the vendor to complete
the implementation project as quickly as possible so that benefits can start flowing before the
system is upgraded. The use of IT, especially the new communication and information
Downloaded by Sheffield Hallam University At 06:36 14 May 2019 (PT)

exchange technologies, has the potential to reduce the time taken for selection, negotiation,
transfer scheduling and implementation stages. The following section outlines the potential
use of the various IT tools and systems at each stage, which can be effectively used in
planning and implementing ERP systems, using stage-gate approach.

Partner selection, negotiation and finalising agreement

The frequent contact and communication between both parties are imperative to ensure
an effective negotiation process (Huang et al., 2004; Jagoda et al., 2010). This can become
problematic if the vendor and buyer or other parties are located in different countries or
are geographically separated within the same country. While videoconferencing or other
social media based systems can be used during the negotiation stage, currently,
privately hosted electronic arbitration rooms are being established for the use of the
legal and business community that can be used for negotiations and beyond
(Ramanathan, 2001).
Lyytinen et al. (2006) have advocated the use of a variety of IT-enabled tools such as
on-line search of patent databases, research web-sites, mega search engines, directories and
on-line libraries, push technology (such as PointCast), web-based surveys, social media
groups and trade mailing lists for identifying potential vendors and buyers of ERP systems.
This will help the managers to reduce the cost of finding partners and time spent in
negotiating with the potential partners.

Preparing and approving an enterprise resource planning system implementation plan

Adequate training is essential to upgrade the technological capabilities of the buyer.
Traditional means of training require the physical movement of personnel between the
vendor and buyer facilities, frequent travel and allocation of considerable time for training
and travel. The time and cost outlay associated with all this often force buyers, especially
those from developing countries, to rely more on learning-by-doing. While the scope and the
content of the training has to be decided by experts, currently, the staggering developments
in communications technologies and social media make it possible to deliver training
through powerful formats very quickly (Burn and Ash, 2005; Ngai et al., 2015; Trimi et al.,
2005; Ramanathan, 2001).
Internet-based conferencing tools such as Internet Relay Chat allow real-time
conferencing between the transferor and the transferee in a global context at a much lower
cost. This can help the parties to rectify problematic areas of the project and undertake
corrective measures before proceeding to the next stage. At this stage, the parties may decide
to initiate steps to establish a better Intranet, which can help to use EDI at the next stage.
 Implementing the enterprise resource planning system and implementation audit ERP system
Development of a sound infrastructure should be carried out simultaneously during implementation
installation and start-up, and this may consist of developing a vendor network for
components, a pool of trained workers and staff, logistics channels and other external
aspects, in all of which modern telecommunications may be handy (Robey et al., 2006).
During implementation, as pointed out by Lyytinen et al. (2006), Extranet, teleconferencing,
internet-based telephone services and mobile computing systems can all be utilised to gain
quick access for assistance and advice from transferor experts to solve problems 103
collaboratively. Integrated PM software with internet, extranet and mobile communication
systems may also be used to estimate, schedule and organise day-to-day activities (Lyytinen
et al., 2006; Sommer, 2003) during the implementation stage.
At the gate the key role of IT interventions would be to use intranets, databases,
e-mail, the internet and groupware to gather information expeditiously to measure
actual performance against the expected results and finalise the audit. Monitoring of
Downloaded by Sheffield Hallam University At 06:36 14 May 2019 (PT)

operations may be in the form of periodic intensive reviews. The findings can be
disseminated widely through IT interventions that have already been discussed above.
IT interventions can be valuable in gathering information for impact assessment.
Teleconferencing and video conferencing may be used to connect to remote experts
(Lyytinen et al., 2006) and ascertain their views. With regard to consolidating the gains
of the transfer project, the transferor may deliver information on updates of the existing
technology or new technologies via e-mail, video mail and computer-based conferencing.
If the transferor and transferee have come this far they may well decide to go for a new IT
project or an extension of the existing agreement. It may be worthwhile for both parties to
consider implementing a collaborative advanced IT infrastructure for supporting effective
transfer. If the buyer decides to go for a new ERP system, they can use IT to exploit a variety
of sources for opportunities.

Managerial implications
While ERP systems are expected to improve the organisational performance and
operational capabilities, the complexity of the process integration often leads to
difficulties and failures (Ram et al., 2014; Beheshti and Beheshti, 2010). Effective
implementation requires careful planning and execution of key processes. Recent
literature suggests that training and education and system integration activities are
critical to obtain the desired competitive advantage (Ram et al., 2014; Chien et al., 2014;
Sudhaman and Thangavel, 2015) and should be integrated to implementation plans. We
believe that the proposed stage-gate approach would assist managers to navigate the
complex implementation in three ways. First, it will assist the managers to carefully plan
the activities at each stage. The proposed approach will help to identify the critical
activities needed to be completed at each stage before committing resources to the next
stage. Second, it helps them to critically evaluate the activities at each stage before
moving to the next stage. If they have not completed the activities to a satisfactory level,
then they can make the necessary adjustments or corrections. To evaluate the
performance at each stage the quantitative modelling approaches such as AHP can be
used as shown in the earlier section. Third, it assists the managers to document and
evaluate the overall project success and to identify any adjustments to be made for the
future projects.
The outcomes of this research have the following major implications:
• The proposed stage-gate model addresses the need for integrated approach for ERP
implementation. It brings together the three important phases of ERP implementation
 Downloaded by Sheffield Hallam University At 06:36 14 May 2019 (PT)

25,1

104

Table I.
IJAIM

Deployment of IT in
ERP implementation
Stage/gate Potential activities with IT deployment IT Systems and tools

Partner selection and negotiation/agreement Agreeing on the value of the ERP system, terms of payment and Privately hosted electronic arbitration rooms with
finalisation intellectual property protection multipoint videoconferencing
Developing a preferred vendor profile On-line search engines, patent databases, research web-
sites, meta-search engines, directories, on-line libraries,
digital versatile discs (DVDs), push technology (such as
PointCast)
Developing a list of potential vendor firms Internet telephony, videoconferencing and
teleconferencing
Preparing implementation plan/approving Developing pragmatic training and education schedule for the Training modules using multimedia technology (CD-
implementation plan workforce ROMs, DVD-ROMs, computer-based multimedia
simulation software, multimedia extranet, e-mails and
video mails, mobile communication, and
teleconferencing etc.)
Formulating measures to build good relationships between the Internet-based conferencing tools, such as IRC (Internet
ERP vendor and implementation partner Relay Chat)
Implementing the ERP system/implementation audit Identifying configuration changes to be made to the ERP system Business process modelling tools for mapping the
to suit local conditions and making the necessary adaptations current practices with ERP system’s blueprint
Recruiting skilled personnel not already available within the Extranet, teleconferencing, internet-based telephone
organisation service and mobile computing systems for
communications among implementation partners and
users
Formulating arrangements with hardware and DBMS vendors Online recruitment through designated websites and
video conferencing for interviewing potential
candidates
Email and video mail systems for scheduling and
organising day-to-day activities during the
implementation stage
ERP system impact assessment/developing Assessing the actual outcomes of the ERP project Teleconferencing and video conferencing for connecting
guidelines for post ERP activities with remote experts and ascertaining their views
Evaluating the adequacy of corrective measures E-mail, video mail and computer-based conferencing for
consolidating the ERP system implementation progress
Identifying new or complementary technologies Use of online market research firms such as @plan
(www.webplan.net) for acquiring business intelligence
 project: pre-implementation roadmap, implementation phase and the post ERP system
implementation. It also established the linkages among each phase. This model is also implementation
useful to educate the managers of the ERP implementation process.
• Managers involved in ERP implementation process can use this model as the basis for
planning the project with clear goals and the project charter. Each stage-gate consists
of key activities and criteria for decision-making, especially at the pre-implementation
stage where managers can develop a check list to make the process effective. 105
• This paper also discussed the use of a wide range of information and communication
technologies available for the managers to address two main issues of any ERP
projects: time and cost. We outlined various IT tools managers can use to reduce the
time and cost of the ERP projects.
Downloaded by Sheffield Hallam University At 06:36 14 May 2019 (PT)

Conclusions
It is evident from broader discussion that the literature on ERP system implementation is
often sparse when it comes to managerial issues, technical details or internal organisational
processes that can influence the effectiveness of the implementation. The integrated model
based on the stage-gate approach presented in this paper is a preliminary attempt to meet
that need. The model is built on the concept of stage-gate, where each stage is identified with
relevant activities. Essentially, the stage-gate model proposed is based on the premise that if
managers of an ERP system implementation project use the proposed stage-gate sequence
and carry out the recommended activities, then problems can be minimised, and, wherever
needed, proactive action can be taken to avoid problems. This paper also made a preliminary
attempt to examine the deployment of IT for enhancing the effectiveness of ERP system
implementation. The deployment options have been examined in conjunction with the
different stages and gates at the implementation cycle to enable a systematic examination of
the various possibilities. However, such deployment has to be considered in the light of some
important issues. This model was developed based on the existing literature. Therefore, case
studies that assess the usefulness of this model are valuable. Future research will involve
developing a detailed questionnaire to investigate the application of this model in ERP
projects (Table I).

References
Abdinnour-Helm, S., Lengnick-Hall, M.L. and Lengnick-Hall, C.A. (2003), “Pre-implementation attitudes
and organizational readiness for implementing an Enterprise Resource Planning system”,
European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 146 No. 2, pp. 258-273.
Ajit, D., Donker, H. and Patnaik, S. (2014), “ERP system implementation announcements: does the
market cheer or jeer the adopters and vendors?”, International Journal of Accounting &
Information Management, Vol. 22 No. 4, pp. 339-356.
Al-Mashari, M. and Zairi, M. (2000), “Supply-chain re-engineering using Enterprise Resource Planning
(ERP) systems: an analysis of a SAP R/3 implementation case”, International Journal of Physical
Distribution and Logistics Management, Vol. 30 Nos 3/4, pp. 296-313.
Al-Mashari, M., Zairi, M. and Okazawa, K. (2006), “Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP)
implementation: a useful road map”, International Journal of Management and Enterprise
Development, Vol. 3 Nos 1/2, pp. 169-180.
Amoako-Gyampah, K. (2004), “ERP implementation factors – a comparison of managerial and end-user
perspectives”, Business Process Management Journal, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 171-183.
Barney, J. (1991), “Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage”, Journal of Management,
Vol. 17 No. 1.
 IJAIM Beheshti, H.M. and Beheshti, C.M. (2010), “Improving productivity and firm performance with
enterprise resource planning”, Enterprise Information Systems, Vol. 4 No. 4, pp. 445-472.
25,1
Burn, J.M. and Ash, C.G.A. (2005), “Dynamic model of e-business strategies for ERP enabled
organizations”, Industrial Management and Data Systems, Vol. 105 No. 8, pp. 1084-1095.
Chakraborty, S. and Sharma, S.K. (2007), “Enterprise resource planning: an integrated strategic
framework”, International Journal of Management and Enterprise Development, Vol. 4 No. 5,
106 pp. 533-551.
Chand, D., Hachey, G., Hunton, J., Owhoso, V. and Vasudevan, S. (2005), “A balanced scorecard based
framework for assessing the strategic impacts of ERP systems”, Computers in Industry, Vol. 56
No. 6, pp. 558-572.
Chien, S., Lin, H. and Shih, C. (2014), “A moderated mediation study: cohesion linking centrifugal and
centripetal forces to ERP implementation performance”, International Journal of Production
Economics, Vol. 158 No. 1, pp. 1-8.
Downloaded by Sheffield Hallam University At 06:36 14 May 2019 (PT)

Davenport, T.H. (2000), Mission is Critical: Realising the Promise of Enterprise Systems, Harvard
Business School Press.
Ettlie, J.E., Perotti, V.J. and Joseph, D.A. (2005), “Strategic predictors of successful enterprise system
deployment”, International Journal of Operations and Production Management, Vol. 25 No. 10,
pp. 953-972.
Ferguson, C. and Seow, P.S. (2011), “Accounting information systems research over the past decade:
past and future trends”, Accounting and Finance, Vol. 51 No. 1, pp. 235-251.
Gajic, G., Stankovski, S., Ostojic, G., Tesic, Z. and Miladinovic, L. (2014), “Method of evaluating the
impact of ERP implementation critical success factors – a case study in oil and gas industries”,
Enterprise Information Systems, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 84-106.
Galy, E. and Sauceda, M. (2014), “Post-implementation practices of ERP systems and their relationship
to financial performance”, Information & Management, Vol. 51 No. 3, pp. 310-319.
Gargeya, V.B. and Brady, C. (2005), “Success and failure factors of adopting SAP in ERP system
implementation”, Business Process Management Journal, Vol. 11 No. 5, pp. 501-516.
Harwood, S. (2003), ERP: The Implementation Cycle, Butterworth-Heinemann, Burlington, MA.
Hsu, P.F., Yen, H.R. and Chung, J.C. (2015), “Assessing ERP post-implementation success at the
individual level: revisiting the role of service quality”, Information & Management, Vol. 52 No. 8,
pp. 925-942.
Huang, S.M., Chang, I.C., Li, S.H. and Lin, M.T. (2004), “Assessing risk in ERP projects: identify and
prioritize the factors”, Industrial Management & Data Systems, Vol. 104 No. 8, pp. 681-688.
Hwang, D., Yang, M.G. and Hong, P. (2015), “Mediating effect of IT-enabled capabilities on competitive
performance outcomes: an empirical investigation of ERP implementation”, Journal of
Engineering and Technology Management, Vol. 36, pp. 1-23.
Jagoda, K., Lonseth, R. and Maheshwari, B. (2010), “Key issues in managing technology transfer
projects: experiences from a Canadian SME”, Management Decision, Vol. 48 No. 3, pp. 366-382.
Jagoda, K. and K. Ramanathan (2005), “Critical success factors for planning and implementing
international technology transfer: a case study from Sri Lanka”, in Kocaglu, D. and Anderson, T.
(Eds), Proceedings of the Portland International Conference on Management of Engineering and
Technology, PICMET, (CDRom), Oregon.
Kale, V. (2000), Implementing SAP R/3: The Guide for Business and Technology Managers, Sams
Publishing, IN.
Kim, Y., Lee, Z. and Gosain, S. (2005), “Impediments to successful ERP implementation process”,
Business Process Management Journal, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 158-170.
Koh, S.L., Gunasekaran, A. and Goodman, T. (2011), “Drivers, barriers and critical success factors for
ERPII implementation in supply chains: a critical analysis”, The Journal of Strategic Information
Systems, Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 385-402.
 Loh, T.C. and Koh, S.C.L. (2004), “Critical elements for a successful enterprise resource planning ERP system
implementation in small and medium-sized enterprises”, International Journal of Production
Research, Vol. 42 No. 17, pp. 3433-3455.
implementation
Lyytinen, K., Nahar, N., Huda, N. and Muravyov, S. (2006), “Success factors for information technology
supported international technology transfer: finding expert consensus”, Information &
Management, Vol. 43 No. 5, pp. 663-677.
Metaxiotis, K., Zafeiropoulos, I., Nikolinakou, K. and Psarras, J. (2005), “Goal directed management
methodology for the support of ERP implementation and optimal adaptation procedure”, 107
Information Management and Computer Security, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 55-71.
Momoh, A., Roy, R. and Shehab, E. (2010), “Challenges in enterprise resource planning implementation:
state-of-the-art”, Business Process Management Journal, Vol. 16 No. 4, pp. 537-565.
Monk, E.F. and Wagner, B.J. (2006), Concepts in Enterprise Resource Planning, 2nd ed., Course
Technology, Thomson Learning, Boston, MA.
Downloaded by Sheffield Hallam University At 06:36 14 May 2019 (PT)

Muscatello, J.R., Small, M.H. and Chen, I.J. (2003), “Implementing enterprise resource planning (ERP)
systems in small and midsize manufacturing firms”, International Journal of Operations &
Production Management, Vol. 23 No. 8, pp. 850-871.
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. 285-296.
Ngai, E.W.T., Moon, K.K., Lam, S.S., Chin, E.S.K. and Tao, S.S.C. (2015), “Social media models,
technologies, and applications: an academic review and case study”, Industrial Management &
Data Systems, Vol. 115 No. 5, pp. 769-802.
Norton, Andrew Lawrence, Yvette May Coulson-Thomas, Colin Joseph Coulson-Thomas and
Colin Ashurst. (2013), “Ensuring benefits realisation from ERP II: the CSF phasing model”,
Journal of Enterprise Information Management, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 218-234.
Olson, D.L. (2004), Managerial Issues of Enterprise Resource Planning Systems, McGraw Hill,
New York, NY.
Pan, G., Teoh, S. and Seow, P. (2014), “Coordinating the processes of resource enrichment and capability
deployment”, International Journal of Accounting & Information Management, Vol. 22 No. 4,
pp. 357-374.
Peslak, A.R. (2006), “Enterprise resources planning success: an exploratory study of the financial
executive perspective”, Industrial Management & Data Systems, Vol. 106 No. 9, pp. 1288-1303.
Ram, J., Wu, M. and Tagg, R. (2014), “Competitive advantage from ERP projects: examining the role of
key implementation drivers”, International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 32 No. 1,
pp. 663-675.
Ramanathan, K. (2001), “E-strategies for technological capability development”, Management of
Engineering and Technology, PICMET’01, Portland International Conference, IEEE, Vol. 1.
Rao, Y., Guo, K. and Chen, Y. (2015), “Information systems maturity, knowledge sharing, and firm
performance”, International Journal of Accounting & Information Management, Vol. 23 No. 2,
pp. 106-127.
Robey, M., Coney, D. and Sommer, R.A. (2006), “Contracting for implementation of standard software”,
Industrial Management and Data Systems, Vol. 106 No. 4, pp. 562-580.
Saaty, T.L. (1990), “An exposition of the AHP in reply to the paper ‘remarks on the analytic hierarchy
process’”, Management Science, Vol. 36 No. 3, pp. 259-268.
Samaranayake, P. (2005), “ERP is not an off-the-shelf software solution: what is ERP? Does it work for
your business?”, Techowatch Lanka, Vol. 4 No. 3, pp. 25-38.
Samaranayake, P. (2006), “Pre-implementation roadmap – integration of readiness assessment with
system options and selection methods”, in Akaiwa, F. and Soni, A. (Eds), Innovation Monograph
II, Indiana University, IN, pp. 103-114.
 IJAIM Samaranayake, P. (2009), “Business process integration, automation, and optimization in ERP:
integrated approach using enhanced process models”, Business Process Management Journal,
25,1 Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 504-526.
Sandoe, K., Corbitt, G. and Boykin, R. (2001), Enterprise Integration, John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ.
Schniederjans, M.J. and Kim, G.C. (2003), “Implementing enterprise resource planning system with total
quality control and business process reengineering survey results”, International Journal
108 Operations and Production Management, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 418-429.
Sense, A. and Kiridena, S. (2014), “Building workforce competencies through complex projects”, in
Harris, R. and Short, T. (Eds), Workforce Development: Perspectives and Issues, Springer
Publishing, Singapore, pp. 153-171.
Sharma, S.K., Chen, C. and Sundaram, S. (2006), “Implementation problems with ERP systems in virtual
enterprises/virtual organizations”, International Journal of Management and Enterprise
Development, Vol. 3 No. 5, pp. 491-509.
Downloaded by Sheffield Hallam University At 06:36 14 May 2019 (PT)

Sirmon, D., Hitt, M. and Ireland, D. (2007), “Managing firm resources in dynamic environments to create
value: looking inside the black box”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 32 No. 1, pp. 273-292.
Somers, T.M., Nelson, K. and Ragowsky, A. (2000), “Enterprise resource planning (ERP) for the next
millennium: development of an integrative framework and implications for research”,
Proceedings of the Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS), Long Beach, CA,
pp. 998-1004.
Sommer, R. (2003), “Business process flexibility: a driver for outsourcing”, Industrial Management and
Data Systems, Vol. 103, Nos 3/4, pp. 177-183.
Stijn, V.E. and Wensley, A. (2001), “Organizational memory and the completeness of process modeling
in ERP systems”, Business Process Management Journal, Vol. 7 No. 3, pp. 181-194.
Sudhaman, P. and Thangavel, C. (2015), “Efficiency analysis of ERP projects – software quality
perspective”, International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 33 No. 4, pp. 961-970.
Sumner, M. (2005), Enterprise Resource Planning, Pearson Prentice Hall, NJ.
Trimi, S., Lee, S.M., Olson, D.L. and Erickson, J. (2005), “Alternative means to implement ERP: internal
and ASP”, Industrial Management & Data Systems, Vol. 105 No. 2, pp. 184-192.
Tsai, M.-T., Li, E.Y., Lee, K.-W. and Tung, W.-H. (2011), “Beyond ERP implementation: the moderating
effect of knowledge management on business performance”, Total Quality Management &
Business Excellence, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 131-144.
Velcu, O. (2007), “Exploring the effects of ERP systems on organizational performance: evidence from
Finnish companies”, Industrial Management and Data Systems, Vol. 107 No. 9, pp. 1316-1334.
Vieira Junior, M., Jagoda, K. and Lucato, W. (2014), “Effective management of international technology
transfer projects: insights from the Brazilian textile industry”, Journal of Manufacturing
Technology Management, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 69-99.
Xu, H., Nord, J.H., Brown, N. and Nord, G.D. (2002), “Data quality issues in implementing an ERP”,
Industrial Management and Data Systems, Vol. 102 No. 1, pp. 47-58.
Zach, O. and Bjorn, E.M. (2012), “Identifying reasons for ERP system customization in SMEs: a multiple
case study”, Journal of Enterprise Information Management, Vol. 25 No. 5, pp. 462-478.
Zach, O., Bjørn, E.M. and Olsen, D.H. (2014), “ERP system implementation in SMEs: exploring the
influences of the SME context”, Enterprise Information Systems, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 309-335.

Further reading
Brigg, W. and Shore, B. (2007), “Competitive analysis of enterprise integration strategies”, Industrial
Management and Data Systems, Vol. 107 No. 7, pp. 925-935.
Estébanez, R., Grande, E.U. and Colomina, C.U. (2010), “Information technology implementation:
evidence in Spanish SMEs”, International Journal of Accounting & Information Management,
Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 39-57.
 Hung, W.-H., Ho, C.-F., Jou, J.-J. and Kung, K.-H. (2012), “Relationship bonding for a better knowledge ERP system
transfer climate: an ERP implementation research”, Decision Support Systems, Vol. 52 No. 2,
pp. 406-414.
implementation
Joyner, B.E. and Onken, H. (2002), “Communication technology in international technology transfer:
breaking time and cost barriers”, American Business Review, June, pp. 17-26.
Koh, S.C.L., Simpson, M., Padmore, J., Dimitriadis, N. and Misopoulo, F. (2006), “An exploratory study
of enterprise resource planning adoption in Greek companies”, Industrial Management and Data
Systems, Vol. 106 No. 7, pp. 1033-1059. 109
Sarkis, J. and Sundarraj, R.P. (2000), “Factors for strategic evaluation of enterprise information
technologies”, International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management, Vol. 30
Nos 3/4, pp. 196-220.
Udo, G.J. and Edoho, F.M. (2000), “Information technology transfer to African nations: an economic
development mandate”, Journal of Technology Transfer, Vol. 25, pp. 329-342.
Downloaded by Sheffield Hallam University At 06:36 14 May 2019 (PT)

About the authors

Kalinga Jagoda, PhD (University of Western Sydney), is an Assistant Professor at the University of
Guelph, Canada. He is a Member of CPA (Canada) and the Chartered Institute of Management
Accountants, UK. He has a degree of Bachelor of Science in Chemical Engineering from the University
of Moratuwa, Sri Lanka. His main areas of scholarly interest include management accounting,
operations management, technology management, entrepreneurship and ERP implementation. Kalinga
Jagoda is the corresponding author and can be contacted at: [email protected]
Premaratne Samaranayake, PhD (University of Melbourne, Australia), is a Senior Lecturer at
Western Sydney University, Australia. He has a degree of Master of Engineering in Industrial
Engineering and Management from Asian Institute of Technology, Thailand; Post-Graduate Diploma
degree in Computer Science from Victoria University, Australia; and a degree of Bachelor of Science in
Mechanical Engineering from University of Moratuwa, Sri Lanka. He has around 25 years of teaching
and research experience and has published a number of papers in top-ranked international journals
such as International Journal of Production Research, Supply Chain Management: An International
Journal, International Journal of Operations and Production Management and European Journal of
Operational Research. His areas of expertise include supply chain management, production planning,
business process management and enterprise resource planning. Recently, he completed SAP
Certification on Best Practices in ERP (BPERP) and is a Certified Solution Consultant of SAP ERP for
small- and medium-sized enterprises.

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: [email protected]
 This article has been cited by:

1. Sharath Sasidharan. 2019. Reconceptualizing knowledge networks for enterprise systems

implementation: incorporating domain expertise of knowledge sources and knowledge flow
intensity. Information & Management 56:3, 364-376. [Crossref]
2. Abdoulmohammad Gholamzadeh Chofreh, Feybi Ariani Goni, Jiří Jaromír Klemeš. 2018.
Sustainable enterprise resource planning systems implementation: A framework development.
Journal of Cleaner Production 198, 1345-1354. [Crossref]
3. Catherine Catherine, Edi Abdurachman. 2018. ERP System Adoption Analysis Using TOE
Framework in Permata Hijau Group (PHG) Medan. International Journal of Enterprise Information
Systems 14:3, 91-105. [Crossref]
4. Abdoulmohammad Gholamzadeh Chofreh, Feybi Ariani Goni, Jiří Jaromír Klemeš. 2018.
Evaluation of a framework for sustainable Enterprise Resource Planning systems implementation.
Journal of Cleaner Production 190, 778-786. [Crossref]
Downloaded by Sheffield Hallam University At 06:36 14 May 2019 (PT)

5. FanBojun, Bojun Fan, JiHannah, Hannah Ji, WeiJune, June Wei, LambertSherwood, Sherwood
Lambert. 2018. Development of tactical solutions for the e-credit card issuing industry.
International Journal of Accounting & Information Management 26:1, 115-131. [Abstract] [Full
Text] [PDF]
6. Elzbieta Wyslocka. 2017. Results of Implementing ERP System in a Multi-plant Enterprise.
MATEC Web of Conferences 125, 04022. [Crossref]