DB
R
41
0
Ac
c.
Pa
y.
C
Fa
c
pr tory
od o
uc ut
tio pu
n t
CR
Re
ve
nu
e
DB
pr Ma CO
od ss 4
uc re 1
tio lea
n se
or
de
r
DB
R
m Raw
at
er
ia
C l
CR
Fi
pr nis
h
o
DB d ed
uc
ts
CR
P
ut
o ro
DB utp d.
Pr
od
or uct
de io
r n
CR
41
In section 3, critical success factors that were focused on during
the review will be explained in detail. The fourth section deals
with the results of the literature review. We will point out which
factors are the most important, and which factors seem to
have little influence on ERP project success. Finally, the chapter
concludes with a summary of the results, as well as a critical
acclaim of the conducted literature review.
CR
DB
5.2 Data Collection Methodology –
Literature Review
The literature review to identify CSFs was performed in several
steps similar to the approach suggested by Webster & Watson
(2002). In general, it was a database-driven review with an
additional search in the proceedings of several IS conferences.
To make our review reproducible, tables of the databases and
search terms are listed in the appendix.
M
pu Co E5
rc nv 9N
ha er
se t to
or
de
r
Ex M
ec D
ut 01
e
M
RP
This multitude of software manufacturers, vendors, and systems
means it is essential for enterprises that use or want to use ERP
systems to find the right software, as well as to be aware of the
factors that influence the success of the implementation project
(Winkelmann & Leyh 2010). Recalling these so-called critical
success factors (CSFs) is of high importance whenever a new
system is to be adopted and implemented, or a running system
needs to be upgraded or replaced. Errors during selection,
implementation, or during the post-implementation phase of
ERP systems, wrong implementation approaches, ERP systems
that do not fit the requirements of the enterprise – all this can
cause financial disadvantages or disasters, even leading to insolvencies. Several examples of such negative scenarios can be
found in the literature (e.g., Barker & Frolick 2003 ; Hsu, Sylvestre
& Sayed 2006).
5
C
pr Con O15
od fi
uc r m
tio
n
CR
Cr
ea VL
te 01
de N
liv
er
y
In
ve
st
DB
m
en
ts
During the last decades, the segment of enterprise resource
planning (ERP) systems was one of the fastest growing
segments in the software market, and these systems are one of
the most important developments in information technology.
Due to strong demand, there are many ERP systems with various
technologies and philosophies available, and the ERP market is
strongly fragmented.
30
41
3
Ca
sh
5.1 Introduction
1
CR
In
re dep
qu e
ire nd
m en
en t
t
Ac
c.
Pa
y.
C
CR
B
CR
Ca
s
pu
t
ut
n
nu
es
Preliminary Version - send comments to pml@hec.ca
h
In
ve
s
Readings on Enterprise Resource Planning
tm
en
ts
DB
GR
/IR
DB
Po
s
R
40
Po M
st IRO
in
vo
ice
CR
/IR
DB
Since the WISO database also provides German papers, we also
used the German translation of most of the search terms. For
the conferences, only inappropriate search fields were provided.
Hence, we decided to manually review abstracts and titles of the
papers in this step.
The next section presents a short overview of our data collection methodology, in order to make our review reproducible.
In
ve
so nto
ld ry
pr ch
od an
uc ge
t
6
Go
od
sr
ec
ei
p
t
Step 2 : During this step we had to define the search terms for
the database-driven review. Keywords selected for this search
were mostly derived from keywords supplied, and used by
authors of some of the relevant articles identified in a preliminary literature review. The search terms used are listed in the
appendix.
GR
CR
m
Ra
w
DB
R
co aw
ns m
um ate
pt ria
io l
n
sa Do
le m
re es
ve tic
nu
es
40
Po M
s IG
re t go O
ce o
ip ds
ts
Step 1 : The first step was to define sources for the literature
review. Therefore, several databases and conference proceedings were identified (cp. Appendix).
at
In order to identify factors that affect the success or failure of ERP
system implementation projects, several case studies, surveys,
and literature reviews were already conducted by different
researchers (e.g., Esteves & Pastor 2000 ; Finney & Corbett 2007 ;
Nah, Zuckweiler & Lau 2003). Most of these literature reviews
cannot be reproduced because of missing descriptions of review
methods and procedures. Vom Brocke et al. (2009) clearly point
out the drawbacks of literature review articles lacking methodological rigour. Therefore, in order to update existing reviews
by including current ERP literature, we conducted a literature
review – a systematic review in five different databases, and
among several proceedings of international conferences. The
CSFs were derived from 185 identified relevant papers, and the
frequency of their entries was counted. The aggregated results
of this review are presented in this chapter.
5
Pu
r
or cha
de se
r
The steps of our review procedure are presented in the following paragraphs. An overview of the number of papers identified
or remaining during/after each step is given in Figure 1. With
each step, the number of papers was reduced according to the
assembly of different criteria.
40
In
v
ch en
DB an tor
ge y
Christian Leyh (Technische Universität Dresden)
M
pr
od Re D0
l
uc e a 7
tio se
DB
C
CR
o
DB raw ns.
DB
Fi
pr nis
od he
uc d
t
Chapter 5 : Critical success Factors for ERP System Selection,
Implementation and Post-Implementation
t p F-53
ay
m
en
ec
.
Leyh – Critical Success Factors for ERP System Selection, Implementation and Post-Implementation
DB
CR
Ac
c.
R
CHAPTER 5
59
DB
R
41
0
Ac
c.
Pa
y.
C
Fa
c
pr tory
od o
uc ut
tio pu
n t
CR
Re
ve
nu
e
DB
DB
pr Ma CO
od ss 4
uc re 1
tio lea
n se
or
de
r
R
m Raw
at
er
ia
C l
CR
Fi
pr nis
h
o
DB d ed
uc
ts
CR
P
ut
o ro
DB utp d.
ec
.
Leyh – Critical Success Factors for ERP System Selection, Implementation and Post-Implementation
DB
CR
Ac
c.
R
CHAPTER 5
185
1
Step 5
41
CR
Ca
sh
506
Step 4
DB
Step 3 : During step 3 we performed the initial search according
to step 1 and step 2, and then eliminated duplicates. The initial
search provided 5429 papers in the databases. After eliminating
duplicates, 3419 articles remained. From the conference search,
79 papers remained. A total of 3498 papers were identified
during the initial search step (cp. Figure 1).
The papers identified consist of those that presented single or
multiple case studies, conducted surveys, literature reviews or
articles where CSFs are derived from chosen literature. Within
these papers, the following 31 CSFs were identified :
• Available Resources (budget, employees, etc.)
• Balanced Project Team
Step 4: Step 4 included the identification of irrelevant papers.
During the initial search we did not apply any restrictions. The
search was not limited to the research field of IS ; therefore,
papers from other research fields were included in results,
too. Thus, these papers had to be excluded. This was done by
reviewing paper abstracts and, if necessary, by looking into the
paper content. Of the papers, 427 stemming from the database
search and all 79 conference papers remained – together this
yielded 506 papers potentially relevant to the field of CSFs for
ERP system implementations (cp. Figure 1).
• Business Process Reengineering
• Change Management
• Clear Goals and Objectives (vision, business plan, etc.)
• Communication
• Company Strategy/Strategy Fit
M
pu Co E5
rc nv 9N
ha er
se t to
or
de
r
Ex M
ec D
ut 01
e
M
RP
5
C
pr Con O15
od fi
uc r m
tio
n
CR
In
ve
st
DB
m
en
ts
41
3
Cr
ea VL
te 01
de N
liv
er
y
3489
Step 3
30
5429
Step 1 & 2
• Data Accuracy (data analysis and conversion)
• Environment (national culture, language, etc.)
Pu
r
or cha
de se
r
• ERP System Acceptance/Resistance
Step 5 : The fifth and final step consisted of a detailed analysis of the remaining 506 papers, and the identification of the
CSFs. Therefore, the content of all 506 papers was reviewed in
depth for the purpose of categorizing identified success factors.
Emphasis was placed not only on the wording of these factors,
but also their meaning. After this step, 185 relevant papers that
suggested, discussed, or mentioned CSFs remained. The analysis results of these 185 papers mentioning CSFs are described in
the following sections.
40
5
• ERP System Configuration
In
re dep
qu e
ire nd
m en
en t
t
• ERP System Tests
Po M
s IG
re t go O
ce o
ip ds
ts
• External Consultants
• Interdepartmental Cooperation
• Involvement of End-Users and Stakeholders
6
• Monitoring and Performance Measurement
• Organizational Culture
Po M
st IRO
in
vo
ice
DB
• Project Champion
40
CR
• Organizational Structure
• Project Leadership/Empowered Decision Makers
• Project Management
t p F-53
ay
m
en
R
co aw
ns m
um ate
pt ria
io l
n
sa Do
le m
re es
ve tic
nu
es
DB
Ra
w
A critical success factor for ERP projects is defined by Finney and
Corbett (2007) as a reference to any condition or element seen
as necessary for the ERP implementation to be successful. The
goal of the literature review was to gain an in-depth understanding of the different CSFs already identified by other researchers.
• Organizational Fit of the ERP System
Ac
c.
Pa
y.
C
m
at
GR
/IR
5.3 Critical Success Factors of ERP
Implementation Success
40
• Knowledge Management
Go
od
sr
ec
ei
p
t
• IT Structure and Legacy Systems
CR
Po
s
B
CR
Ca
s
pu
t
ut
n
nu
es
Preliminary Version - send comments to pml@hec.ca
h
In
ve
s
Readings on Enterprise Resource Planning
tm
en
ts
DB
GR
/IR
DB
In
ve
so nto
ld ry
pr ch
od an
uc ge
t
R
• Skills, Knowledge and Expertise
CR
Databases
M
pr
od Re D0
l
uc e a 7
tio se
Pr
od
or uct
de io
r n
CR
C
DB
CR
In
v
ch en
DB an tor
ge y
CR
o
DB raw ns.
DB
Fi
pr nis
od he
uc d
t
Figure 1 - Progress of the Literature Review
60
DB
R
41
0
Ac
c.
Pa
y.
C
Fa
c
pr tory
od o
uc ut
tio pu
n t
CR
Re
ve
nu
e
DB
DB
Pr
od
or uct
de io
r n
1
41
CR
DB
Clear Goals and Objectives (vision, business plan, etc.) :
Clear goals and objectives are seen as CSFs by many researchers
(e.g., Esteves & Pastor 2000 ; Nah et al. 2001 ; Somers & Nelson
2001). This requires formulating a business vision, calculating a
business case, identifying and communicating clear goals and
objectives regarding ERP implementation, and providing a
clear link between business goals and the company’s IS strategy (Al-Mashari, Al-Mudimigh & Zairi 2003 ; Finney & Corbett
2007). This is needed to steer the project direction throughout
the whole ERP implementation. Therefore, a good business plan
that outlines proposed strategic and tangible benefits, includes
resources, calculates costs and risks, and specifies a clear
timeline is critical to an ERP project. These instruments can be
very helpful to maintain focus on project benefits and outcomes
(Loh & Koh 2004).
5
40
Po
s
t p F-53
ay
m
en
40
Po M
st IRO
in
vo
ice
R
Ac
c.
Pa
y.
C
CR
CR
GR
/IR
40
6
Go
od
sr
ec
ei
p
t
Communication : CSF communication is one of the most difficult and challenging tasks during the implementation of an ERP
system. The existence of a clear concept addressing communication, which contains a communication strategy as well as
the respective communication channels and methods, is very
important. This strategy should match the goals and requirements of the ERP project, and should enable open and free
communication by providing an adequate communication
platform (Al-Mashari et al. 2003). Expectations at every level
need to be communicated (Loh & Koh 2004). The communication between management, the project team, and employees
should be clear on a regular basis.
CR
B
CR
Ca
s
pu
t
ut
n
nu
es
Preliminary Version - send comments to pml@hec.ca
h
In
ve
s
Readings on Enterprise Resource Planning
tm
en
ts
DB
GR
/IR
DB
In
ve
so nto
ld ry
pr ch
od an
uc ge
t
R
co aw
ns m
um ate
pt ria
io l
n
sa Do
le m
re es
ve tic
nu
es
DB
Ra
w
m
at
Business Process Reengineering : Business process reengineering (BPR) is a crucial project phase in ERP projects, although it
often leads to delays in ERP implementation (Kumar et al. 2003).
During ERP projects companies have to review their business
processes, and explore new ways of doing things relative to
best practices embedded in the ERP system. The deeper and
more detailed this review, the better the outcome of the BPR
will be (Francoise et al. 2009 ; Rajagopal 2002). Changing activities and workflows in business processes before, during, or after
the ERP implementation may lead to a different and minimized
level of ERP system configuration (Remus 2007). It is advisable
to minimize the extent of ERP system modification. This reduces
errors, and the company can more easily take advantage of
newer versions and releases. Therefore, the project team or top
management should decide to what extent the company has to
change their business processes to fit the ERP system (Rosario
2000).
Po M
s IG
re t go O
ce o
ip ds
ts
In
re dep
qu e
ire nd
m en
en t
t
Pu
r
or cha
de se
r
M
pu Co E5
rc nv 9N
ha er
se t to
or
de
r
Ex M
ec D
ut 01
e
M
RP
Balanced Project Team : In general, a project team consists
of at least two people working together for a common goal,
whereby each team member has defined responsibilities and
functions (Humphrey 2000). The characteristics of the team
members should complement each other, their experience,
their knowledge, and their soft skills (Hesseler & Goertz 2007).
For an ERP implementation it is important to have a solid, core
implementation team comprised of the organization’s best
and brightest individuals (Finney & Corbett 2007). These team
members should be assigned to the project on a fulltime basis.
Only then can they fully concentrate on the project and not be
disturbed or distracted with their daily business (Shanks & Parr
2000).
5
C
pr Con O15
od fi
uc r m
tio
n
CR
Cr
ea VL
te 01
de N
liv
er
y
In
ve
st
DB
m
en
ts
Available Resources (budget, employees, etc.) : ERP implementation projects require a lot of resources such as money,
time and employees. These requirements need to be determined early in the project or even before it starts (Remus 2007).
It is very difficult to secure resource commitment in advance
(Reel 1999) to ensure the success of the implementation project.
An appropriate budget is the basis for a solid project execution.
If the budget allocated is too small other success factors can be
negatively affected (Achanga et al. 2006).
30
41
3
Ca
sh
• Vendor Tools and Implementation Methods
M
pr
od Re D0
l
uc e a 7
tio se
pr Ma CO
od ss 4
uc re 1
tio lea
n se
or
de
r
R
C
DB
• Vendor Relationship and Support
DB
• User Training
CR
In
v
ch en
DB an tor
ge y
• Use of a Steering Committee
CR
o
DB raw ns.
CR
• Troubleshooting
Change Management : Change management involves early
participation of all persons affected by a change process in order
to reduce resistance against these changes. Important components include adequate training, especially of the IT-department,
as well as early communication of the changes in order to
provide employees with an opportunity to react (Al-Mashari
& Al-Mudimigh 2003). Change management strategies are
responsible for handling enterprise-wide cultural and structural
changes. Therefore, it is necessary to train and educate employees in various ways. Thereby, change management not only
aims to prevent rejection and support acceptance, but also to
make employees understand and want the changes. Integrating
employees in the planning and implementation process early
on is important to achieve this understanding. A support team
should also be available during user training sessions, in order
to clarify and answer questions regarding new processes and
functions. Furthermore, an additional evaluation with end users
should be accomplished after the “go live” to uncover problems
and avoid discord (Loh & Koh 2004).
DB
Fi
pr nis
od he
uc d
t
• Top Management Support and Involvement
m Raw
at
er
ia
C l
CR
Fi
pr nis
h
o
DB d ed
uc
ts
CR
P
ut
o ro
DB utp d.
ec
.
Leyh – Critical Success Factors for ERP System Selection, Implementation and Post-Implementation
DB
CR
Ac
c.
R
CHAPTER 5
61
DB
R
41
0
Ac
c.
Pa
y.
C
Fa
c
pr tory
od o
uc ut
tio pu
n t
CR
Re
ve
nu
e
DB
DB
Pr
od
or uct
de io
r n
41
1
M
pr
od Re D0
l
uc e a 7
tio se
pr Ma CO
od ss 4
uc re 1
tio lea
n se
or
de
r
R
C
CR
5
C
pr Con O15
od fi
uc r m
tio
n
ERP System Tests : In ERP implementation, “go live” on the
system without adequate and planned system testing may lead
to an organizational disaster. Tests and validation of an ERP
system are necessary to ensure that the system works technically correctly, and that business process configuration was
done the right way (Apperlrath & Ritter 2000). Therefore testing
and simulation exercises must be performed during the final
stages of the implementation process for both separate parts
/ functions, and the system as a whole (Al-Mashari et al. 2003 ;
Finney & Corbett 2007).
M
pu Co E5
rc nv 9N
ha er
se t to
or
de
r
Ex M
ec D
ut 01
e
M
RP
Data Accuracy (data analysis and conversion) : A fundamental requirement for the effectiveness and the success of ERP
systems is the availability of accurate data. Problems concerning
data can cause heavy implementation delays. Therefore, data
migration management represents a critical factor throughout
implementation (Somers & Nelson 2001 ; Umble, Haft & Umble
2003). Identifying which data has to be loaded into the system
and which is extraneous, as well as converting all disparate
data structures into a single consistent format is an important
challenge. The conversion process is often underestimated. In
addition, interfaces with other internal and external systems
(between departments such as accounting, production, data
warehouses, etc.) have to be considered, too (Somers & Nelson
2001).
30
en
ts
CR
In
ve
st
DB
m
ERP System Configuration : Since the initial ERP system version
is based on best practices, a configuration or adaption of the
system according to business processes is necessary in every
ERP implementation project. Hence, the company should try to
adopt the processes and options built into the ERP as much as
possible, rather than seek to modify it (Esteves & Pastor 2000).
Following Hong & Kim (2002), the more strongly the original ERP
software is modified (e.g., even beyond the “normal” configuration) the smaller the chance is for a successful implementation project. Hence, a good business vision is helpful because
it reduces the effort of capturing the functionality of the ERP
business model and therefore minimizes the effort needed for
the configuration (Esteves & Pastor 2000). Extensive system
modifications will not only cause implementation problems,
but also harm system maintenance. Therefore, fewer adjustments reduce the effort of integrating new versions, releases or
updates (Loh & Koh 2004).
DB
Ca
sh
CR
41
3
CR
o
DB raw ns.
CR
DB
5
40
Po
s
t p F-53
ay
m
en
40
Po M
st IRO
in
vo
ice
R
Ac
c.
Pa
y.
C
CR
CR
GR
/IR
40
6
Go
od
sr
ec
ei
p
t
External Consultants : The use of external consultants
depends on internal know-how and experience at the moment
of project initiation (Esteves & Pastor 2000). Many organizations use consultants to facilitate the implementation process.
Consultants are experienced in specific industries, have comprehensive knowledge ofcertain modules, and may be better able
to determine what will work best for a given company (Piturro
1999). Consultants are often involved in all stages of the implementation : performing requirements analysis, recommending
a suitable solution, and managing the implementation (Somers
& Nelson 2001). Therefore, it is necessary to determine the
number of consultants, how and when to use them, as well as
their responsibilities within the implementation project (Esteves
& Pastor 2000).
CR
B
CR
Ca
s
pu
t
ut
n
nu
es
Preliminary Version - send comments to pml@hec.ca
h
In
ve
s
Readings on Enterprise Resource Planning
tm
en
ts
DB
GR
/IR
DB
In
ve
so nto
ld ry
pr ch
od an
uc ge
t
R
co aw
ns m
um ate
pt ria
io l
n
sa Do
le m
re es
ve tic
nu
es
DB
Ra
w
m
at
ERP System Acceptance/Resistance : Every person and
department should be responsible and accountable for the
whole ERP system, and key users from different departments
have to be committed to the implementation project on a
fulltime basis (Zhang et al. 2005). Therefore, a lack of user and
stakeholder input and acceptance may reduce the chance of a
successful implementation (Soh et al. 2000). If employees are
not psychologically ready for change and do not accept the
new ERP system, their attitudes and behaviours will hinder
them from working and resolving conflicts with consultants,
Po M
s IG
re t go O
ce o
ip ds
ts
In
re dep
qu e
ire nd
m en
en t
t
Pu
r
or cha
de se
r
Environment (national culture, language, etc.) : The effects
and the relevance of national cultures to ERP implementation
are pointed out in several studies (e.g., Krumbholz & Maiden
2001 ; Zhang, Lee et al. 2003). Basic values, beliefs and norms
in different countries are factors that influence organizational
culture, and in turn, affect the practices of professional activities, including ERP implementation (Krumbholz & Maiden 2001).
Cultural differences can cause problems during an ERP project,
such as different beliefs in providing access to information,
miscommunication due to language difficulties, or problems in
reengineering organizational processes (Xue et al. 2005).
DB
In
v
ch en
DB an tor
ge y
Company Strategy/Strategy fit : To ensure the success of an
ERP implementation, the changes caused by the ERP system
have to be linked with the company’s long-time strategic goals.
The ERP system should support this strategy, or even be one of
the important factors for the strategy´s success. The implementation project as part of the enterprise-wide strategy (e.g., the
implementation as a method of strategic goal achievement) is
mandatory (Soja 2007).
Cr
ea VL
te 01
de N
liv
er
y
as well as from acquiring necessary ERP knowledge (McLachlin
1999). Accordingly, higher user and stakeholder support should
positively affect communication and conflict resolution in the
ERP consulting process (Wang & Chen 2006).
DB
Fi
pr nis
od he
uc d
t
Detailed information about the project status, achieved results,
or decisions made by management is as essential as the direct
discussion, for example, of fears and conflicts.
m Raw
at
er
ia
C l
CR
Fi
pr nis
h
o
DB d ed
uc
ts
CR
P
ut
o ro
DB utp d.
ec
.
Leyh – Critical Success Factors for ERP System Selection, Implementation and Post-Implementation
DB
CR
Ac
c.
R
CHAPTER 5
62
DB
R
41
0
Ac
c.
Pa
y.
C
Fa
c
pr tory
od o
uc ut
tio pu
n t
CR
Re
ve
nu
e
DB
DB
Pr
od
or uct
de io
r n
41
1
M
pr
od Re D0
l
uc e a 7
tio se
pr Ma CO
od ss 4
uc re 1
tio lea
n se
or
de
r
R
C
CR
5
C
pr Con O15
od fi
uc r m
tio
n
30
Ca
sh
DB
en
ts
CR
In
ve
st
DB
m
Monitoring and Performance Measurement : In the context
of project management, mechanisms for performance measurement have to be established. Measuring and evaluating performance is a critical factor for ensuring the success of any business
organization (Al-Mashari et al. 2003). Constant measurement
and monitoring of the progress enables early discovery of errors
and gaps, as well as their removal or correction (Al-Mashari &
Al-Mudimigh 2003).
Involvement of End-Users and Stakeholders : This factor is
one of the most frequently cited CSFs (Esteves et al. 2003). Users
and stakeholders must perceive the system as being important
and necessary to their work (Barki & Hartwick 1991). Therefore,
involvement and participation in the ERP project is mandatory
for all end-users and stakeholders affected by the ERP implementation, and will result in meeting more user requirements,
better system quality, and an increase in use and acceptance
(Esteves & Pastor 2000). It is important to get users and stakeholders involved during system implementation, and to make
use of their knowledge in areas where the project team lacks
expertise and knowledge (Francoise et al. 2009). According
to Ghosh (2002), this involvement in the project, from start to
finish, is just as crucial as the involvement of top management.
Organizational Culture : Organizational culture is embedded
within national culture, and is therefore a critical factor affecting ERP system implementation. Every company has its own
unique organizational culture, which may or may not be strong
and enduring, and which may be reflected in either openness
for change, or the opposite (Zhang et al. 2005). An organization that implements an ERP system has to change its business
processes to achieve a better fit with ERP best-practice processes. These changes both impact the organization´s culture, and
are constrained by it (Krumbholz & Maiden 2001 ; Zhang et al.
2005).
In
re dep
qu e
ire nd
m en
en t
t
5
t
40
CR
B
CR
Ca
s
pu
t
ut
n
nu
es
Preliminary Version - send comments to pml@hec.ca
h
In
ve
s
Readings on Enterprise Resource Planning
tm
en
ts
DB
GR
/IR
DB
Po
s
R
Ac
c.
Pa
y.
C
t p F-53
ay
m
en
40
Po M
st IRO
in
vo
ice
CR
CR
/IR
GR
at
m
In
ve
so nto
ld ry
pr ch
od an
uc ge
t
6
Go
od
sr
ec
ei
p
Organizational Fit of the ERP System : The fact that an ERP
system’s organizational fit should be thoroughly examined
and considered before its implementation sounds logical.
Nevertheless, ERP vendors tend to set up blind confidence in
their ERP package, even if it is obvious that the organizational fit is low. Hong & Kim (2002) empirically examined to what
extent the implementation success of an ERP system depends
on the fit between company and ERP system, and found out that
R
co aw
ns m
um ate
pt ria
io l
n
sa Do
le m
re es
ve tic
nu
es
DB
Ra
w
Knowledge Management : Knowledge management during
ERP implementation projects is an important factor. Sharing
knowledge is somewhat unique since ERP projects redefine
jobs and blur traditional intra-organizational boundaries (Jones
& Price 2004). It is crucial to exchange knowledge and problems
within the organization. Employees possess a knowledgebase
40
Po M
s IG
re t go O
ce o
ip ds
ts
Some researchers argue that a successful technological innovation requires that either the technology be designed to fit the
organization’s current structure and culture, or that the organization’s structure and culture has to be redesigned and changed
to fit the new technology (Cabrera et al. 2001 ; Yusuf et al. 2004).
DB
IT Structure and Legacy Systems : It is critical to assess the
company’ IT readiness, including IT architecture and employee
skills (Finney & Corbett 2007 ; Somers & Nelson 2001). If necessary, infrastructure might need to be upgraded or changed
depending on ERP system requirements (Kumar et al. 2002 ;
Palaniswamy & Frank 2002). Also, the current legacy systems
need attention. It is important that an organization approaches the transition of a legacy system carefully and develops
a comprehensive plan. During ERP projects, existing legacy
systems must be carefully reviewed, defined, and evaluated in
order to prepare for possible problems and hindrances that may
arise during implementation (Al-Mashari et al. 2003 ; Holland &
Light 1999 ; Nah et al. 2001).
Pu
r
or cha
de se
r
M
pu Co E5
rc nv 9N
ha er
se t to
or
de
r
Ex M
ec D
ut 01
e
M
RP
CR
o
DB raw ns.
CR
DB
CR
In
v
ch en
DB an tor
ge y
41
3
Cr
ea VL
te 01
de N
liv
er
y
that is indispensable to the company (Francoise et al. 2009).
During ERP implementation knowledge must be shared among
departments and across functional and divisional boundaries
(Baskerville et al. 2000). Thus, a knowledge management process
has to be established to ensure that information will be correctly
exchanged within the project team, and with all other people
involved in the ERP project (e.g., external consultants or the ERP
vendor’s employees). In addition, the organization must ensure
the transfer of as much knowledge as possible from consultants
or ERP vendors, in order to be able to use the new ERP system
autonomously (Francoise et al. 2009).
DB
Fi
pr nis
od he
uc d
t
Interdepartmental Cooperation : To successfully implement
an ERP system it is necessary that all departments cooperate at the same level of intensity and engagement, since an
ERP system affects all business units and business processes
across functional and departmental boundaries. This requires
the sharing of common goals instead of emphasizing individual pursuits. Also, to share information within a company and
between different companies requires cooperation between
partners, employees, managers, and corporations based on
trust and the willingness to cooperate. Issues such as prestige,
job security, feelings of control, and departmental politics are
also involved and have to be considered and managed (Somers
& Nelson 2001 ; Stefanou 1999).
m Raw
at
er
ia
C l
CR
Fi
pr nis
h
o
DB d ed
uc
ts
CR
P
ut
o ro
DB utp d.
ec
.
Leyh – Critical Success Factors for ERP System Selection, Implementation and Post-Implementation
DB
CR
Ac
c.
R
CHAPTER 5
63
DB
R
41
0
Ac
c.
Pa
y.
C
Fa
c
pr tory
od o
uc ut
tio pu
n t
CR
Re
ve
nu
e
DB
DB
M
pr
od Re D0
l
uc e a 7
tio se
pr Ma CO
od ss 4
uc re 1
tio lea
n se
or
de
r
Pr
od
or uct
de io
r n
1
41
30
5
C
pr Con O15
od fi
uc r m
tio
n
Skills, Knowledge and Expertise : The existing knowledge
and experiences of company employees plays a central role in
implementing an ERP system. Better knowledge, experience,
education, and personal skills can improve the ERP project´s
accomplishments, and improve the handling of the implementation. This factor is often influenced and affected by the companies´ strategy and financial budget. The acceptance of, and the
readiness for changes is substantially higher in enterprises
where a philosophy of constant improvement and knowledge
enhancement prevails (Achanga et al. 2006).
Project Champion : A project champion is a staunch advocate
of the ERP implementation project, and is necessary for better
and faster agreement within the project team, and for overseeing the entire project life cycle and all processes. The project
champion’s main tasks are to be the first contact person for
any issues concerning the ERP project, and to ensure project
progress within the enterprise. The project champion ensures
the prompt resolution of conflicts and resistance, serving as
mediator to a certain degree (Loh & Koh 2004). In many ERP
implementations the leader of the ERP project takes the position
of project champion, but this is not the only solution. A member
of senior management that is not a direct project team member
can also act as project champion.
M
pu Co E5
rc nv 9N
ha er
se t to
or
de
r
Ex M
ec D
ut 01
e
M
RP
R
C
CR
Ca
sh
DB
CR
In
ve
st
DB
m
en
ts
41
3
CR
o
DB raw ns.
CR
DB
CR
5
40
Po
s
t p F-53
ay
m
en
40
Po M
st IRO
in
vo
ice
R
Ac
c.
Pa
y.
C
DB
CR
CR
GR
/IR
40
6
Go
od
sr
ec
ei
p
t
Thus, innovations, particularly new technologies, are better
accepted by employees if they are promoted by top management. Before the project starts, top management has to identify
the peculiarities and challenges of the planned ERP implementation. Since many decisions made during the project affect
the whole enterprise, they can often only be made by senior
managers, and will require their full acceptance and commitment (Becker et al. 2007). Commitment of top management is
important in order to allocate necessary resources, make quick
and effective decisions, solve conflicts that need enterprisewide acceptance, and to reach and support a co-operation of all
departments (Al-Mashari et al. 2003).
CR
B
CR
Ca
s
pu
t
ut
n
nu
es
Preliminary Version - send comments to pml@hec.ca
h
In
ve
s
Readings on Enterprise Resource Planning
tm
en
ts
DB
GR
/IR
In
ve
so nto
ld ry
pr ch
od an
uc ge
t
R
co aw
ns m
um ate
pt ria
io l
n
sa Do
le m
re es
ve tic
nu
es
DB
Ra
w
m
at
Project Leadership/Empowered Decision Makers : The
project leader should be a strong and charismatic individual
with experience in both project management and directing
employees. This person has to manage the project according
to the project plan, and react to problems that can arise during
ERP implementation. Therefore, the project leader can take
the role as project champion as well. In general, project team
leaders have to be empowered to make quick decisions in order
to reduce delays during implementation. This is important,
since even small delays can heavily impact a long-term project
like ERP implementation (Esteves & Pastor 2000). With empowered decision makers and strong project leadership, effective
timing with respect to the implementation is enhanced (Finney
& Corbett 2007 ; Gupta 2000 ; Shanks & Parr 2000).
Po M
s IG
re t go O
ce o
ip ds
ts
In
re dep
qu e
ire nd
m en
en t
t
Pu
r
or cha
de se
r
Top Management Support and Involvement : Top management support and involvement is one of the most important success factors for an ERP implementation (Achanga et al.
2006). Committed leadership from top management is the basis
for the continuous accomplishment of every project (Finney &
Corbett 2007).
DB
In
v
ch en
DB an tor
ge y
Organizational Structure : Organizational structure is a determining factor in ERP system implementation. Since ERP systems
are designed according to “best practice” principles, they aim to
fit with the greatest possible number of companies. Therefore,
configuration becomes essential to map system functions with
the company structure (Soffer et al. 2005). So, the company´s
structure should enable the implementation and use of ERP
systems as well as other IT systems. Nevertheless, BPR can
become mandatory, as not all of the company’s structure can be
mapped in the ERP system, causing the structure to need adapting. Many organizations underestimate the lack of alignment
between the ERP system and their organizational structure, and
thus the effort required for system configuration or BPR during
the implementation (Francoise et al. 2009).
Cr
ea VL
te 01
de N
liv
er
y
Project Management : Project management refers to the
ongoing management of the implementation plan (Finney &
Corbett 2007). The implementation of an ERP system is a unique
procedure that requires enterprise-wide project management.
Therefore, the planning stage involves the allocation of responsibilities, the definition of milestones and critical paths, training and human resource planning, and the determination of
measures of success (Al-Mashari & Al-Mudimigh 2003 ; Nah et
al. 2001). This creates a more organized approach to decision
making, and guarantees that decisions are made by the most
suitable company members. Furthermore, continuous project
management makes it possible to focus on the important
aspects of the ERP implementation, and ensures timeliness, and
that schedules are met (Al-Mashari & Al-Mudimigh 2003). Within
project management, a comprehensive documentation of tasks,
responsibilities and goals is indispensable for the success of ERP
implementations (Snider et al. 2009).
DB
Fi
pr nis
od he
uc d
t
adaptation and configuration effort negatively correlate with
implementation success. Therefore, it is essential to select an
ERP system carefully by considering its specific organizational
fit such as company size or industry sector. Thus, selecting the
right ERP system is an important factor to ensure the fit between
the company and the ERP system.
m Raw
at
er
ia
C l
CR
Fi
pr nis
h
o
DB d ed
uc
ts
CR
P
ut
o ro
DB utp d.
ec
.
Leyh – Critical Success Factors for ERP System Selection, Implementation and Post-Implementation
DB
CR
Ac
c.
R
CHAPTER 5
64
DB
R
41
0
Ac
c.
Pa
y.
C
Fa
c
pr tory
od o
uc ut
tio pu
n t
CR
Re
ve
nu
e
DB
DB
Pr
od
or uct
de io
r n
41
1
M
pr
od Re D0
l
uc e a 7
tio se
pr Ma CO
od ss 4
uc re 1
tio lea
n se
or
de
r
R
C
CR
5
C
pr Con O15
od fi
uc r m
tio
n
30
Ca
sh
DB
en
ts
In
ve
st
DB
m
CR
5.4 Literature Review – Results
As stated above, 185 papers (single or multiple case studies,
surveys, literature reviews, etc.) were identified as referring to
critical success factors of ERP implementation projects. These
papers were reviewed again in depth in order to determine
the different concepts of CSFs. Overall, 31 factors (as described
above) were identified. In most previous literature reviews the
CSFs were grouped more coarsely so that fewer CSFs were used
(e.g., Finney & Corbett 2007 ; Loh & Koh 2004 ; Somers & Nelson
2001). This grouping was not done within our review. With 31
factors we used a larger number than other researchers, as
we expected the resulting distribution to be more insightful.
If wider definitions of some CSFs are needed later on, further
aggregation is still possible.
User Training : Often, missing or lacking end user training is a
reason for failure during the implementation of new software.
The main goal of end user training is to provide an effective
understanding of the new business processes, applications, and
workflows that result from ERP implementation. Therefore, it is
important to set up a suitable plan for the training and education
of employees (Al-Mashari et al. 2003). Furthermore, during such
an extensive project which employee fits best for which position
or application of the new software must be determined. This
strongly depends on his/her already acquired knowledge and/
or for which employee additional training courses are necessary
(Teich et al. 2008).
Pu
r
or cha
de se
r
M
pu Co E5
rc nv 9N
ha er
se t to
or
de
r
Ex M
ec D
ut 01
e
M
RP
CR
o
DB raw ns.
CR
DB
CR
5
40
t
40
6
Go
od
sr
ec
ei
p
Po M
st IRO
in
vo
ice
CR
/IR
GR
40
CR
t p F-53
ay
m
en
Po
s
CR
B
CR
Ca
s
pu
t
ut
n
nu
es
Preliminary Version - send comments to pml@hec.ca
h
In
ve
s
Readings on Enterprise Resource Planning
tm
en
ts
DB
GR
/IR
DB
In
ve
so nto
ld ry
pr ch
od an
uc ge
t
R
Ac
c.
Pa
y.
C
R
co aw
ns m
um ate
pt ria
io l
n
sa Do
le m
re es
ve tic
nu
es
DB
Ra
w
m
at
Vendor Relationship and Support : ERP systems may be a
lifelong commitment for many companies. There will always be
new modules and versions to install, bug fixes to be rolled out,
and changes to be made in order to achieve a better fit between
business and system. Therefore, good vendor support (technical
assistance, emergency maintenance and updates) is an important factor. Accordingly, the relationship/partnership with the
vendor is vitally important to successful ERP projects. This
relationship should be strategic in nature, with the ERP provider
enhancing an organization’s competitiveness and efficiency
(Somers & Nelson 2001 ; Willcocks & Sykes 2000).
Po M
s IG
re t go O
ce o
ip ds
ts
In
re dep
qu e
ire nd
m en
en t
t
After identifying the relevant papers and the factors stated
within them we developed a table to match the factors with the
papers for the analysis. Figure 2 shows a snapshot of this CSF
table.
DB
In
v
ch en
DB an tor
ge y
41
3
Use of a Steering Committee : To make ERP projects succeed,
it is necessary to form a steering committee. A steering committee allows senior management to directly monitor the project
team’s decision making, thereby ensuring adequate control
mechanisms. Therefore, this committee should consist of
members of senior management (from different departments
or corporate functions), representatives from project management, and end users (also from different departments). Such a
composition will guarantee appropriate involvement across the
whole company (Somers & Nelson 2001 ; Sumner 1999).
Cr
ea VL
te 01
de N
liv
er
y
Vendor Tools and Implementation Methods : Implementation
technologies, programs, and methods provided by vendors can
significantly reduce the cost and time of deploying ERP systems
(Somers & Nelson 2001). Depending on the chosen implementation and roll-out method (e.g., big bang strategy, satellite
strategy, etc.) there are advantages and risks that have to be
considered. Also, not every strategy is applicable in every ERP
project or company. Hence, the choice has to be made carefully.
An additional goal of implementation tools is transferring the
knowledge of using the software, understanding the business
processes within the organization, and recognizing industry
best practices (Somers & Nelson 2001).
DB
Fi
pr nis
od he
uc d
t
Troubleshooting : Troubleshooting is essential and starts at the
shakedown phase. This factor is related to the problem and risk
areas of ERP projects (Esteves & Pastor 2000 ; Loh & Koh 2004).
Quick responses, patience, perseverance and problem solving
capabilities are important during an ERP system implementation (Rosario 2000). An implementation plan should include
various troubleshooting mechanisms. Two important critical “moments” are the migration of old data, and the “go live”
(Esteves & Pastor 2000).
m Raw
at
er
ia
C l
CR
Fi
pr nis
h
o
DB d ed
uc
ts
CR
P
ut
o ro
DB utp d.
ec
.
Leyh – Critical Success Factors for ERP System Selection, Implementation and Post-Implementation
DB
CR
Ac
c.
R
CHAPTER 5
65
DB
R
41
0
Ac
c.
Pa
y.
C
Fa
c
pr tory
od o
uc ut
tio pu
n t
CR
Re
ve
nu
e
DB
281 responses
2003
Literature
54 responses from
Review, Survey CIOs of companies
which have
implemented ERP
systems
X
CFSs derived
from literature
and proven by
field studies /
Survey
48 Mexican
companies
X
2004
Case studies
5 large companies
1659.
1999
Literature
Review + Case
studies
8 large companies
3048.
2009
Case study
1 large company
1977.
2008
Survey
130 responses,
SME
DB
pr Ma CO
od ss 4
uc re 1
tio lea
n se
or
de
r
CR
X
X
X
1
41
CR
Ca
sh
USER
TRAINING
DB
en
ts
CHANGE
MANAGEMENT
X
X
X
30
5
C
pr Con O15
od fi
uc r m
tio
n
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
each year around 20 papers about CSFs are published. Therefore,
it can be argued that a review every 2 or 3 years is reasonable in
order to update the results of previously performed literature
reviews.
Po M
s IG
re t go O
ce o
ip ds
ts
In
re dep
qu e
ire nd
m en
en t
t
As is shown, the CSFs for each paper were captured, as well
as the year, type of data collection used, and the companies
(number and size) from which the CSFs were derived.
5
1785.
Ex M
ec D
ut 01
e
M
RP
X
EXTERNAL
CONSULTANTS
40
2007
M
pr
od Re D0
l
uc e a 7
tio se
Literaturebased, Survey
PROJECT
MANAGEMENT
Pr
od
or uct
de io
r n
2008
BALANCED
PROJECT TEAM
(CROSS-FUNCTIONAL)
Pu
r
or cha
de se
r
1733.
R
91 responses from
companies which
have implemented
ERP systems
ERP SYSTEM
CONFIGURATION
M
pu Co E5
rc nv 9N
ha er
se t to
or
de
r
1777.
C
Literaturebased, Survey
41
3
Cr
ea VL
te 01
de N
liv
er
y
1685.
o
DB raw ns.
NUMBER OF
COMPANIES &
COMPANY SIZE
CR
2008
ACADEMIC SOURCE COMPLETE
FORMS OF
DATA
COLECCTION
In
ve
st
DB
m
1936.
DB
CR
DB
Fi
pr nis
od he
uc d
t
Figure 2 - Snapshot of the CSF Results
CR
YEAR
In
v
ch en
DB an tor
ge y
ID
m Raw
at
er
ia
C l
CR
Fi
pr nis
h
o
DB d ed
uc
ts
CR
P
ut
o ro
DB utp d.
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
ARTICLES
6
29
23
23
25
18
23
11
12
5
6
40
1999 1998
6
3
DB
GR
2000
CR
Thus, these articles were not included in our review, as well as
the AMCIS 2010, and the ICIS 2010, since these conferences had
not taken place until the date of our review.
Po
s
CR
B
CR
Ca
s
pu
t
ut
n
nu
es
Preliminary Version - send comments to pml@hec.ca
h
In
ve
s
Readings on Enterprise Resource Planning
tm
en
ts
DB
GR
/IR
DB
In
ve
so nto
ld ry
pr ch
od an
uc ge
t
R
Ac
c.
Pa
y.
C
R
co aw
ns m
um ate
pt ria
io l
n
sa Do
le m
re es
ve tic
nu
es
DB
The small number of papers in 2010 is due to the fact that we
conducted the database review in June 2010. Additionally, some
databases provide access to journal articles only if they are older
than 12 months.
1
t p F-53
ay
m
en
Ra
w
m
at
CR
2010
/IR
YEAR
Po M
st IRO
in
vo
ice
Table 1 - Paper Distribution
Go
od
sr
ec
ei
p
t
All 185 papers were published between 1998 and 2010. Table 1
shows the distribution of articles per year. As is shown, most of
the papers were published between 2009 and 2004. Since 2004,
40
ec
.
Leyh – Critical Success Factors for ERP System Selection, Implementation and Post-Implementation
DB
CR
Ac
c.
R
CHAPTER 5
66
DB
R
41
0
Ac
c.
Pa
y.
C
Fa
c
pr tory
od o
uc ut
tio pu
n t
CR
Re
ve
nu
e
DB
DB
pr Ma CO
od ss 4
uc re 1
tio lea
n se
or
de
r
R
m Raw
at
er
ia
C l
CR
Fi
pr nis
h
o
DB d ed
uc
ts
CR
P
ut
o ro
DB utp d.
CR
Pr
od
or uct
de io
r n
DB
C
CR
o
DB raw ns.
Figure 3 - CSFs Ordered by Frequency
1
41
CR
DB
40
Comparing these results with other literature reviews, for
example, Finney and Corbett’s (2007), it becomes obvious that
the top five factors are similar, with only the positions being
different. Due to our large literature base, total numbers are
much higher (Table 2).
OUR REVIEW
25
Top Management Support
and Involvement
128
25
Project Management
104
Rank #3
BPR and Software Configuration
23
User Training
99
Training and Job Redesign
23
Change Management
Project Team : the Best and Brightest
21
Balanced Project Team
R
86
CR
GR
/IR
DB
85
B
CR
Ca
s
pu
t
ut
n
nu
es
Preliminary Version - send comments to pml@hec.ca
h
In
ve
s
Readings on Enterprise Resource Planning
tm
en
ts
DB
Rank #5
In
ve
so nto
ld ry
pr ch
od an
uc ge
t
Rank #4
Ac
c.
Pa
y.
C
Change Management
R
co aw
ns m
um ate
pt ria
io l
n
Rank #2
40
CR
Ra
w
Top Management Commitment and
Support
DB
sa Do
le m
re es
ve tic
nu
es
Rank #1
t p F-53
ay
m
en
DB
NUMBER OF
INSTANCES
m
at
FACTOR
CR
NUMBER OF
INSTANCES
GR
FACTOR
Po M
st IRO
in
vo
ice
/IR
FINNEY & CORBETT (2007)
40
Table 2 - Literature Review Comparison
6
Go
od
sr
ec
ei
p
t
Po M
s IG
re t go O
ce o
ip ds
ts
In
re dep
qu e
ire nd
m en
en t
t
It is shown that “Top Management Support and Involvement,”
“Project Management” and “User Training” are the three most
named factors with a number around and above 100.
5
Pu
r
or cha
de se
r
M
pu Co E5
rc nv 9N
ha er
se t to
or
de
r
30
5
C
pr Con O15
od fi
uc r m
tio
n
CR
Ex M
ec D
ut 01
e
M
RP
Cr
ea VL
te 01
de N
liv
er
y
In
ve
st
DB
m
en
ts
41
3
Ca
sh
CR
In
v
ch en
DB an tor
ge y
M
pr
od Re D0
l
uc e a 7
tio se
DB
Fi
pr nis
od he
uc d
t
Figure 3 shows the results of our review – the identified CSFs and their total numbers.
Po
s
ec
.
Leyh – Critical Success Factors for ERP System Selection, Implementation and Post-Implementation
DB
CR
Ac
c.
R
CHAPTER 5
67
DB
R
41
0
Ac
c.
Pa
y.
C
Fa
c
pr tory
od o
uc ut
tio pu
n t
CR
Re
ve
nu
e
DB
DB
Pr
od
or uct
de io
r n
41
1
M
pr
od Re D0
l
uc e a 7
tio se
pr Ma CO
od ss 4
uc re 1
tio lea
n se
or
de
r
R
C
CR
5
C
pr Con O15
od fi
uc r m
tio
n
30
Ca
sh
DB
CR
In
ve
st
DB
m
en
ts
41
3
Cr
ea VL
te 01
de N
liv
er
y
CR
o
DB raw ns.
CR
DB
CR
In
v
ch en
DB an tor
ge y
Concerning company size, only 12 papers explicitly focus on
small and medium sized enterprises (S&MEs), mostly within
single or multiple case studies. In some surveys S&MEs are
included and analyzed as well, but they are a minority in these
surveys. Therefore, deriving CSFs which are important for S&MEs
is difficult and can be seen as lacking in the CSF research.
5.5 Conclusion
Regarding our literature review, there are limitations that have
to be mentioned, too. We are aware that we cannot be sure to
have identified all relevant papers published in journals and
conferences, as we selected five databases and five international
conferences. Therefore, journals not included in our databases,
and proceedings of other conferences might also contain
relevant articles. Another limitation is the coding of the CSFs.
We tried to reduce this subjectivity by formulating coding rules
and by discussing the coding of CSFs among three independent researchers. Hence, other researchers may code the CSFs
in another way. To repeat or reproduce our procedure, the list
of identified papers from each step can be requested from the
author.
DB
Fi
pr nis
od he
uc d
t
Regarding the form of data collection, it has to be stated that the
papers consist of 95 single or multiple case studies, 55 surveys
and 35 literature reviews or articles where CSFs are derived from
chosen literature.
m Raw
at
er
ia
C l
CR
Fi
pr nis
h
o
DB d ed
uc
ts
CR
P
ut
o ro
DB utp d.
ec
.
Leyh – Critical Success Factors for ERP System Selection, Implementation and Post-Implementation
DB
CR
Ac
c.
R
CHAPTER 5
5
40
Po M
st IRO
in
vo
ice
CR
DB
40
CR
t p F-53
ay
m
en
Po
s
CR
B
CR
Ca
s
pu
t
ut
n
nu
es
Preliminary Version - send comments to pml@hec.ca
h
In
ve
s
Readings on Enterprise Resource Planning
tm
en
ts
DB
GR
/IR
DB
In
ve
so nto
ld ry
pr ch
od an
uc ge
t
R
Ac
c.
Pa
y.
C
R
co aw
ns m
um ate
pt ria
io l
n
sa Do
le m
re es
ve tic
nu
es
DB
Ra
w
m
at
GR
/IR
40
6
Go
od
sr
ec
ei
p
t
Po M
s IG
re t go O
ce o
ip ds
ts
In
re dep
qu e
ire nd
m en
en t
t
This ranking is similar to the ranking of other literature reviews
(e.g., Finney & Corbett 2007 or Somers & Nelson 2001). The
number of papers included in our study exceeded the number
found in most of these reviews. One reason for this is that these
reviews are older than ours. As shown in Table 1 every year since
2004 around 20 or more CFS papers are published. Thus, one
conclusion is that it is advisable to renew literature reviews on
ERP system CSFs every two or three years in order to update
results. Another conclusion is related to the size of the companies. Most of the papers and studies identified focus on large
companies. Small and medium-sized enterprises are – if included at all – usually underrepresented in quantitative studies.
Studies exclusively focusing on S&MEs are rare. We identified 12
out of the 185 articles with this explicit focus. This can be seen as
a clear lack of research, which is mentioned by other authors as
well (e.g., Snider et al. 2009).
Pu
r
or cha
de se
r
M
pu Co E5
rc nv 9N
ha er
se t to
or
de
r
Ex M
ec D
ut 01
e
M
RP
The aim of our study was to gain insight into the research of
critical success factors of ERP implementation projects. Research
on ERP implementation and critical success factors can be seen
as a valuable step toward increasing chances of implementation success (Finney & Corbett 2007). Our study reveals that
there are several papers – case studies, surveys, and literature
reviews –focusing on CSFs. All in all, we identified 185 relevant
papers. From these existing studies we derived 31 different
CSFs. We identified the following top three CSFs : top management support and involvement, project management, and user
training.
68
DB
R
41
0
Ac
c.
Pa
y.
C
Fa
c
pr tory
od o
uc ut
tio pu
n t
CR
Re
ve
nu
e
DB
DB
pr Ma CO
od ss 4
uc re 1
tio lea
n se
or
de
r
R
m Raw
at
er
ia
C l
CR
Fi
pr nis
h
o
DB d ed
uc
ts
CR
P
ut
o ro
DB utp d.
ec
.
Leyh – Critical Success Factors for ERP System Selection, Implementation and Post-Implementation
DB
CR
Ac
c.
R
CHAPTER 5
AMCIS (2009 – 1998)
CR
WISO
DB
Pr
od
or uct
de io
r n
HICCS (2009 – 1998)
ICIS (2009 – 1998)
5
Cr
ea VL
te 01
de N
liv
er
y
SpringerLink
ECIS (2009 – 1998)
C
pr Con O15
od fi
uc r m
tio
n
In
ve
st
DB
m
Science Direct
CR
en
ts
Business Source Complete
30
41
3
Ca
sh
Academic Search Complete
1
CONFERENCES
41
DATABASES
M
pr
od Re D0
l
uc e a 7
tio se
CR
C
DB
Table 3 - Sources for the Literature Review
CR
In
v
ch en
DB an tor
ge y
CR
o
DB raw ns.
DB
Fi
pr nis
od he
uc d
t
Appendix – Data Sources and Search Terms
Wirtschaftsinformatik (2009 – 1998)
Table 4 - Search Fields and Search Terms
DATABASE + SEARCH FIELDS
SEARCH TERMS / KEYWORDS
Academics Search Complete :
“TI Title” or “AB Abstract or Author
Supplied Abstract”
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Science Direct :
“Abstract, Title, Keywords”
5
Po M
st IRO
in
vo
ice
CR
DB
40
CR
t p F-53
ay
m
en
Po
s
CR
B
CR
Ca
s
pu
t
ut
n
nu
es
Preliminary Version - send comments to pml@hec.ca
h
In
ve
s
Readings on Enterprise Resource Planning
tm
en
ts
DB
GR
/IR
DB
In
ve
so nto
ld ry
pr ch
od an
uc ge
t
R
Ac
c.
Pa
y.
C
R
co aw
ns m
um ate
pt ria
io l
n
sa Do
le m
re es
ve tic
nu
es
DB
Ra
w
m
at
GR
/IR
40
6
Go
od
sr
ec
ei
p
t
Po M
s IG
re t go O
ce o
ip ds
ts
In
re dep
qu e
ire nd
m en
en t
t
WISO :
“General Search Field”
40
SpringerLink :
“Title” or “Abstract”
Pu
r
or cha
de se
r
M
pu Co E5
rc nv 9N
ha er
se t to
or
de
r
Ex M
ec D
ut 01
e
M
RP
Business Source Complete :
“TI Title” or “AB Abstract or Author
Supplied Abstract”
ERP + success*
ERP + failure
ERP + crit*
ERP + CSF
ERP + CFF
ERP + fact*
“Enterprise system*” + success*
“Enterprise system*” + failure
“Enterprise system*” + crit*
“Enterprise system*” + CSF
“Enterprise system*” + CFF
“Enterprise system*” + fact*
69
DB
R
41
0
Ac
c.
Pa
y.
C
Fa
c
pr tory
od o
uc ut
tio pu
n t
CR
Re
ve
nu
e
DB
DB
Pr
od
or uct
de io
r n
DB
CR
In
v
ch en
DB an tor
ge y
Achanga, P., Nelde, G., Roy, R., and Shehab, E. 2006. “Critical Success Factors for Lean Implementation within SMEs,” Journal of
Manufacturing Technology Management (17:4), June, pp. 460–471.
M
pr
od Re D0
l
uc e a 7
tio se
pr Ma CO
od ss 4
uc re 1
tio lea
n se
or
de
r
R
CR
C
CR
o
DB raw ns.
DB
Fi
pr nis
od he
uc d
t
References
m Raw
at
er
ia
C l
CR
Fi
pr nis
h
o
DB d ed
uc
ts
CR
P
ut
o ro
DB utp d.
ec
.
Leyh – Critical Success Factors for ERP System Selection, Implementation and Post-Implementation
DB
CR
Ac
c.
R
CHAPTER 5
1
Ca
sh
Al-Mashari, M., and Al-Mudimigh, A. 2003. “ERP Implementation: Lessons from a Case Study,” Information Technology & People
(16:1), March, pp. 21–33.
In
ve
st
DB
m
41
CR
DB
en
ts
41
3
Al-Mashari, M., Al-Mudimigh, A., and Zairi, M. 2003. “Enterprise Resource Planning: A Taxonomy of Critical Factors,” European
Journal of Operational Research (146:2), April, pp. 352-364.
5
C
pr Con O15
od fi
uc r m
tio
n
CR
Cr
ea VL
te 01
de N
liv
er
y
Apperlrath, H., and Ritter, J. 2000. SAP R/3 Implementation: Method and Tools, Berlin, Germany: Springer.
30
Barker, T., and Frolick, M. N. 2003. “ERP Implementation Failure: A Case Study,” Information Systems Management (20:4), Fall 2003,
pp. 43-49.
Barki, H., and Hartwick, J. 1991. “User Participation and User Involvement in Information System Development,” Proceedings of the
24th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, January, Kauai, Hawaii, IEEE Computer Society (4), pp. 487-492.
Baskerville, R., Pawlowski, S., and McLean, E. 2000. “Enterprise Resource Planning and Organizational Knowledge: Patterns
of Convergence and Divergence,” Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS), Brisbane, Australia,
December 10-13, pp. 396-406.
Becker, J., Vering, O., and Winkelmann, A. 2007. Softwareauswahl und –einführung in Industrie und Handel – Vorgehen bei und
Erfahrungen mit ERP- und Warenwirtschaftssystemen, Berlin, Germany: Springer.
M
pu Co E5
rc nv 9N
ha er
se t to
or
de
r
Ex M
ec D
ut 01
e
M
RP
Cabrera, A., Cabrera, E. F., and Barajas, S. 2001. “The Key Role of Organizational Culture in a Multi-System View of Technology
Driven Change,” International Journal of Information Management (21:3), June, pp. 245–261.
Esteves-Sousa, J., and Pastor-Collado, J. 2000. “Towards the Unification of Critical Success Factors for ERP Implementations,”
Proceedings of the 10th Annual Business Information Technology (BIT) Conference, Manchester, UK, November 1-2.
40
5
Pu
r
or cha
de se
r
Esteves, J., Pastor, J., and Casanovas, J. 2003. “A Goal/Question/Metric Research Proposal to Monitor User Involvement and
Participation in ERP Implementation Projects,” Paper presented at the Information Resources Management Association Conference
(IRMA), Philadelphia, USA, May 2003.
Po M
s IG
re t go O
ce o
ip ds
ts
In
re dep
qu e
ire nd
m en
en t
t
Finney, S., and Corbett, M. 2007. “ERP Implementation: A Compilation and Analysis of Critical Success Factors,” Business Process
Management Journal (13:3), June, pp. 329-347.
Francoise, O., Bourgault, M., and Pellerin, R. 2009. “ERP Implementation by Critical Success Factor Management,” Business Process
Management Journal (15:3), June, pp. 371-394.
40
6
Go
od
sr
ec
ei
p
t
Ghosh, S. 2002. “Challenges on a Global Implementation of ERP Software,” Proceedings of the IEEE International Engineering
Management Conference, Cambridge, August 18-20, IEEE: International (1), pp. 101-106.
CR
GR
/IR
Gupta, A. 2000. “Enterprise Resource Planning: The Emerging Organizational Value Systems,” Industrial Management & Data Systems
(100:3), April, pp. 114-188.
Po M
st IRO
in
vo
ice
DB
CR
Ra
w
m
at
Hesseler, M., and Goertz, M. 2007. Basiswissen ERP-Systeme – Auswahl, Einführung & Einsatz betriebswirtschaftlicher Standardsoftware,
Witten, Germany: W3l.
R
co aw
ns m
um ate
pt ria
io l
n
Hong, K.-K., and Kim, Y.-G. 2002. “The Critical Success Factors for ERP Implementation: An Organizational Fit Perspective,”
Information and Management (40:1), October, pp. 25-40.
Po
s
CR
B
CR
Ca
s
pu
t
ut
n
nu
es
Preliminary Version - send comments to pml@hec.ca
h
In
ve
s
Readings on Enterprise Resource Planning
tm
en
ts
DB
GR
/IR
DB
In
ve
so nto
ld ry
pr ch
od an
uc ge
t
R
Ac
c.
Pa
y.
C
Humphrey, W. S. 2000. Introduction to the team software process, Amsterdam, Netherlands: Addison-Wesley.
t p F-53
ay
m
en
sa Do
le m
re es
ve tic
nu
es
DB
40
Holland, C., and Light, B. 1999. ”A Critical Success Factors Model for ERP Implementation,” IEEE Software (6:3), May/June, pp. 30–36.
70
DB
R
41
0
Ac
c.
Pa
y.
C
Fa
c
pr tory
od o
uc ut
tio pu
n t
CR
Re
ve
nu
e
DB
DB
CR
C
CR
o
DB raw ns.
DB
Fi
pr nis
od he
uc d
t
Hsu, K., Sylvestre, J., and Sayed, E. N. 2006. “Avoiding ERP Pitfalls,” The Journal of Corporate Accounting & Finance (17:4), May/June,
pp. 67-74.
Pr
od
or uct
de io
r n
DB
CR
In
v
ch en
DB an tor
ge y
Jones, M. C., and Price L. R. 2004. “Organizational Knowledge Sharing in ERP implementation: Lessons from Industry,” Journal of
Organizational and End User Computing (16:1), January-March, pp. 21-40.
M
pr
od Re D0
l
uc e a 7
tio se
pr Ma CO
od ss 4
uc re 1
tio lea
n se
or
de
r
R
m Raw
at
er
ia
C l
CR
Fi
pr nis
h
o
DB d ed
uc
ts
CR
P
ut
o ro
DB utp d.
ec
.
Leyh – Critical Success Factors for ERP System Selection, Implementation and Post-Implementation
DB
CR
Ac
c.
R
CHAPTER 5
1
Konradin Business GmbH. 2009. Konradin ERP-Studie 2009: Einsatz von ERP-Lösungen in der Industrie,. Leinfelden-Echterdingen,
Germany: Konradin Mediengruppe.
41
CR
DB
en
ts
41
3
Ca
sh
Krumbholz, M., and Maiden, N. 2001. “The Implementation of Enterprise Resource Planning Packages in Different Organizational
and National Cultures,” Information Systems (26:3), May, pp. 185–204.
30
5
C
pr Con O15
od fi
uc r m
tio
n
CR
Cr
ea VL
te 01
de N
liv
er
y
In
ve
st
DB
m
Kumar, V., Maheshwari, B., and Kumar, U. 2002. “ERP Systems Implementation: Best Practices in Canadian Government
Organizations,” Government Information Quarterly (19:2), Summer 2002, pp. 147-172.
Kumar, V., Maheshwari, B., and Kumar, U. 2003. “An Investigation of Critical Management Issues in ERP Implementation: Empirical
Evidence from Canadian Organizations,” Technovation (23:10), October, pp. 793-807.
Loh, T. C., and Koh, S. C. L. 2004. “Critical Elements for a Successful Enterprise Resource Planning Implementation in Small-and
Medium-Sized Enterprises,” International Journal of Production Research (42:17), September, pp. 3433–3455.
McLachlin, R. D. 1999. “Factors for Consulting Engagement Success,” Management Decision (37:5), June, pp. 394-402.
Nah, F. F-H., Lau, J. L-S., and Kuang, J. 2001. “Critical Factors for Successful Implementation of Enterprise Systems,” Business Process
Management Journal (7:3), August, pp. 285-296.
Nah, F. F-H., Zuckweiler, K. M., and Lau, J. L-S. 2003. “ERP Implementation: Chief Information Officers’ Perceptions of Critical
Success Factors,” International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction (16:1), pp. 5-22.
M
pu Co E5
rc nv 9N
ha er
se t to
or
de
r
Ex M
ec D
ut 01
e
M
RP
Palaniswamy, R., and Frank, T. G. 2002. “Oracle ERP and Network Computing Architecture: Implementation and Performance,”
Information Systems Management (19:2), January, pp. 53-69.
Piturro, M. 1999. “How Midsize Companies Are Buying ERP,” Journal of Accountancy (188:3), September, pp. 41-48.
40
5
Pu
r
or cha
de se
r
Rajagopal, P. 2002. “An Innovation-Diffusion View of Implementation of Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Systems and
Development of a Research Model,” Information and Management (40:2), December, pp. 87-114.
In
re dep
qu e
ire nd
m en
en t
t
Reel, J. S. 1999. “Critical Success Factors in Software Projects,” IEEE Software (16:3), May/June, pp. 18-23.
Po M
s IG
re t go O
ce o
ip ds
ts
Remus, U. 2007. “Critical Success Factors for Implementing Enterprise Portals: A Comparison with ERP Implementations,” Business
Process Management Journal (13:4), July, pp. 538-552
Rosario, J. G. 2000. “On the Leading Edge: Critical Success Factors in ERP Implementation Projects,” Business World, May, pp. 15–29.
40
6
Go
od
sr
ec
ei
p
t
Shanks, G., and Parr, A. 2000. “A Model of ERP Project Implementation,” Journal of Information Technology (15:4), December, pp.
289-303.
CR
GR
/IR
Snider, B., da Silveira, G. J. C., and Balakrishnan, J. 2009. “ERP Implementation at SMEs: Analysis of Five Canadian Cases,”
International Journal of Operations & Production Management (29:1), January, pp. 4-29.
Po M
st IRO
in
vo
ice
DB
CR
Ra
w
m
at
Soffer, P., Golany, B., and Dori, D. 2005. “Aligning an ERP System with Enterprise Requirements: An Object-Process-Based
Approach,” Computers in Industry (56:6), August, pp. 639-662.
Po
s
CR
B
CR
Ca
s
pu
t
ut
n
nu
es
Preliminary Version - send comments to pml@hec.ca
h
In
ve
s
Readings on Enterprise Resource Planning
tm
en
ts
DB
GR
/IR
DB
In
ve
so nto
ld ry
pr ch
od an
uc ge
t
R
Ac
c.
Pa
y.
C
R
co aw
ns m
um ate
pt ria
io l
n
Soja, P. 2007. “Success Factors across ERP Implementation Phases: Learning from Practice,” in Advances in Information Systems
Development: New Methods and Practice for the Networked Society, W. Wojtkowski, W. G. Wojtkowski, J. Zupancic, G. Magyar, and G.
Knapp (eds.), New York: Springer, (vol. 2), pp. 275-286.
t p F-53
ay
m
en
sa Do
le m
re es
ve tic
nu
es
DB
40
Soh, C., Sia, S. K., and Tay-Yap, J. 2000 “Cultural Fits and Misfits: Is ERP a Universal Solution,” Communications of the ACM (43:4),
April, pp. 47–51.
71
DB
R
41
0
Ac
c.
Pa
y.
C
Fa
c
pr tory
od o
uc ut
tio pu
n t
CR
Re
ve
nu
e
DB
DB
CR
C
CR
o
DB raw ns.
DB
Fi
pr nis
od he
uc d
t
Somers, T.M., and Nelson, K. 2001. “The Impact of Critical Success Factors across the Stages of Enterprise Resource Planning
Implementations,” Proceedings of the 34th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Hawaii, January 3-6.
Pr
od
or uct
de io
r n
DB
CR
In
v
ch en
DB an tor
ge y
Stefanou, C. 1999. “Supply Chain Management and Organizational Key Factors for Successful Implementation of Enterprise
Resource Planning (ERP) Systems,” Proceeding of the Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS 1999), Milwaukee, WI, August
13-15, pp. 800-802.
M
pr
od Re D0
l
uc e a 7
tio se
pr Ma CO
od ss 4
uc re 1
tio lea
n se
or
de
r
R
m Raw
at
er
ia
C l
CR
Fi
pr nis
h
o
DB d ed
uc
ts
CR
P
ut
o ro
DB utp d.
ec
.
Leyh – Critical Success Factors for ERP System Selection, Implementation and Post-Implementation
DB
CR
Ac
c.
R
CHAPTER 5
1
41
CR
41
3
Ca
sh
Sumner, M. 1999. “Critical Success Factors in Enterprise Wide Information Management Systems”. Proceedings of the Americas
Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS 1999), Milwaukee, WI, August 13-15, pp. 232-234.
DB
en
ts
Teich, I., Kolbenschlag, W., and Reiners, W. 2008. Der richtige Weg zur Softwareauswahl, Berlin, Heidelberg, Germany: Springer.
30
5
C
pr Con O15
od fi
uc r m
tio
n
CR
Cr
ea VL
te 01
de N
liv
er
y
In
ve
st
DB
m
Umble, E. J., Haft, R. R., and Umble, M. M. 2003. “Enterprise Resource Planning: Implementation Procedures and Critical Success
Factors,” European Journal of Operational Research (146:2), April, pp. 241-257.
Vom Brocke, J., Simons, A., Niehaves, B., Riemer, K., Plattfaut, R., and Cleven, A. 2009. “Reconstructing the Giant: On the
Importance of Rigour in Documenting the Literature Search Process,” Proceedings of the 17th European Conference on Information
Systems, Verona, Italy, June 8-10.
Wang, E. T. G., and Chen J. H. F. 2006. “Effects of Internal Support and Consultant Quality on the Consulting Process and ERP
System Quality,” Decision Support Systems (42:2), November, pp. 1029–1041.
Webster; J., and Watson, R. T. 2002. “Analyzing the Past Preparing the Future: Writing a Literature Review,” MIS Quarterly (26:2),
June, pp. xiii-xxiii.
Willcocks, L. P., and Sykes, R. 2000. “The Role of the CIO and IT Function in ERP,” Communications of the ACM (43:4), April, pp. 32-38.
M
pu Co E5
rc nv 9N
ha er
se t to
or
de
r
Ex M
ec D
ut 01
e
M
RP
Winkelmann, A., and Leyh, C. 2010. “Teaching ERP Systems: A Multi-Perspective View on the ERP System Market,” Journal of
Information Systems Education (21:2), Summer 2010, pp. 233-240.
Xue, Y., Liang, H., Boulton, W. R., and Snyder, C. A. 2005. “ERP Implementation Failures in China: Case Studies with Implications
for ERP Vendors,” International Journal of Production Economics (97:3), September, pp. 279-295.
5
Pu
r
or cha
de se
r
Yusuf, Y., Gunasekaran, A., and Abthorpe, M. K. 2004. “Enterprise Information Systems Project Implementation: A Case Study of
ERP in Rolls-Royce,” International Journal of Production Economics (87:3), February, pp. 251–266.
Po M
s IG
re t go O
ce o
ip ds
ts
In
re dep
qu e
ire nd
m en
en t
t
40
Zhang, L., Lee, M. K. O., Zhang, Z., and Banerjee, P. 2003. “Critical Success Factors of Enterprise Resource Planning Systems
Implementation Success in China,” Proceedings of the 36th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Hawaii, January 6-9,
pp. 236–245.
Po M
st IRO
in
vo
ice
CR
DB
40
CR
t p F-53
ay
m
en
Po
s
CR
B
CR
Ca
s
pu
t
ut
n
nu
es
Preliminary Version - send comments to pml@hec.ca
h
In
ve
s
Readings on Enterprise Resource Planning
tm
en
ts
DB
GR
/IR
DB
In
ve
so nto
ld ry
pr ch
od an
uc ge
t
R
Ac
c.
Pa
y.
C
R
co aw
ns m
um ate
pt ria
io l
n
sa Do
le m
re es
ve tic
nu
es
DB
Ra
w
m
at
GR
/IR
40
6
Go
od
sr
ec
ei
p
t
Zhang, Z., Lee M. K. O., Huang P., Zhang, L., and Huang, X. 2005. ”A Framework of ERP Systems Implementation Success in China:
An Empirical Study,” International Journal of Production Economics (98:1), October, pp. 56-80.
72
h
CR
/IR
GR
DB
t p F-53
ay
m
en
Po
s
R
Ac
c.
Pa
y.
C
40
DB
at
m
Po M
st IRO
in
vo
ice
CR
Ra
w
CR
/IR
GR
6
40
t
Go
od
sr
ec
ei
p
Po M
s IG
re t go O
ce o
ip ds
ts
5
40
Pu
r
or cha
de se
r
M
pu Co E5
rc nv 9N
ha er
se t to
or
de
r
30
5
C
pr Con O15
od fi
uc r m
tio
n
CR
en
ts
4. Which CSFs have a frequency of less than 20 in the literature ?
DB
41
CR
1
Ca
sh
3. Which is the most important CSF ?
CR
DB
DB
5. What are the differences between “organizational structure” and “organizational fit of the ERP system” ?
In
ve
st
DB
m
C
CR
CR
DB
R
m Raw
at
er
ia
C l
CR
Fi
pr nis
h
o
DB d ed
uc
ts
CR
Ac
c.
R
DB
ec
.
DB
CR
CR
Re
ve
nu
e
41
0
DB
Ac
c.
Pa
y.
C
R
Fa
c
pr tory
od o
uc ut
tio pu
n t
Leyh – Critical Success Factors for ERP System Selection, Implementation and Post-Implementation
ut
P
o ro
DB utp d.
DB
pr Ma CO
od ss 4
uc re 1
tio lea
n se
or
de
r
Fi
pr nis
od he
uc d
t
o
DB raw ns.
DB
M
pr
od Re D0
l
uc e a 7
tio se
Pr
od
or uct
de io
r n
CR
In
v
ch en
DB an tor
ge y
2. Why is it necessary to consider CSFs in ERP implementation projects ?
B
en
ts
Ex M
ec D
ut 01
e
M
RP
1. What does the abbreviation “CSF” mean ?
Ca
s
pu
t
ut
n
Readings on Enterprise Resource Planning
tm
In
ve
so nto
ld ry
pr ch
od an
uc ge
t
R
co aw
ns m
um ate
pt ria
io l
n
sa Do
le m
re es
ve tic
nu
es
41
3
Questions
In
ve
s
es
Preliminary Version - send comments to pml@hec.ca
nu
In
re dep
qu e
ire nd
m en
en t
t
Cr
ea VL
te 01
de N
liv
er
y
CHAPTER 5
73
Purchase answer to see full
attachment