Evaluating enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems using an interpretive approach

ABSTRACT

Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) systems involve the purchase of pre-written software modules from third party suppliers, rather than bespoke (i.e. specially tailored) production of software requirements, and are often described as a buy rather than build approach to information systems development. Current research has shown that there has been a notable decrease in the satisfaction levels of ERP implementations over the period 1998-2000.

The environment in which such software is selected, implemented and used may be viewed as a social activity system, which consists of a variety of stakeholders e.g. users, developers, managers, suppliers and consultants. In such a context, an interpretive research approach (Walsham, 1995) is appropriate in order to understand the influences at work.

This paper reports on an interpretive study that attempts to understand the reasons for this apparent lack of success by analyzing issues raised by representatives of key stakeholder groups. Resulting critical success factors are then compared with those found in the literature, most notably those of Bancroft et al (1998).

Conclusions are drawn on a wide range of organizational, management and political issues that relate to the multiplicity of stakeholder perceptions.

REFERENCES

• 1: Nancy H. Bancroft , Frank Cunningham, Implementing Sap R/3, Prentice Hall PTR, Upper Saddle River, NJ, 1996
• 2: Peter Checkland , Jim Scholes, Soft systems methodology in action, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, NY, 1990
• 3: Thomas H. Davenport, Mission Critical: Realizing the Promise of Enterprise Systems, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA, 2000
• 4: Ezingeard, J., and Chandler-Wilde, R (1999) Evaluating how ERP can provide Competitive Advantage: Basis for a Research Framework. In: Proceedings of Sixth European Conference on IT Evaluation. Brunel University. 4-5 November. 307- 313.
• 5: Hirt, S and Swanson, E. B. (1999) Adopting SAP at Siemens Power Corporation. Journal of Information Technology. 14. 243-251.
• 6: Hunter, R (1999) Is ERP Delivery so bad Gartner Group Report.
• 7: Lewin, K (1951) Field Theory in Social Science. Harper and Row.
• 8: Myers, M. (1998) Interpretive Research in Information Systems. Chapter in: Mingers, M., and Stowell, F. (eds) (1998) Information Systems: An Emerging Discipline? McGraw-Hill. Maidenhead.
• 9: Skok, W., and Hackney, R. (1999) Managing the Integration of IT within the Business: reflections on organizational, educational and international issues. Journal of Failures and lessons Learned in IT Management. 3.2. August.
• 10: Walsham, G. (1995) The Emergence of Interpretivism in IS Research. Information Systems Research. 6. 4. 376-394.
• 11: Wynekoop, J. L., and Russo, N. L. (1997) Studying system development methodologies: an examination of research methods. Information Systems Journal. 7.47- 6.

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  K. Computing Milieux
  K.6 MANAGEMENT OF COMPUTING AND INFORMATION SYSTEMS

General Terms:
Documentation, Management

Keywords:
ERP evaluation, interpretive study, stakeholder analysis