Kennesaw State University

DigitalCommons@Kennesaw State University

African Conference on Information Systems The 7th Annual ACIST Proceedings (2021)
and Technology

Aug 26th, 12:00 AM - Aug 27th, 12:00 AM

ERP Pre-Implementation Readiness Assessment Framework: A

Multi Stakeholders’ Perspective
Rahel Tekleselassie
Addis Ababa University, rahel.tekle10@gmail.com

Lemma Lessa
Addis Ababa University, lemma.lessa@aau.edu.et

Solomon Negash
Kennesaw State University, snegash@kennesaw.edu

Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.kennesaw.edu/acist

Tekleselassie, Rahel; Lessa, Lemma; and Negash, Solomon, "ERP Pre-Implementation Readiness
Assessment Framework: A Multi Stakeholders’ Perspective" (2021). African Conference on Information
Systems and Technology. 6.
https://digitalcommons.kennesaw.edu/acist/2021/allpapers/6

This Event is brought to you for free and open access by the Conferences, Workshops, and Lectures at
DigitalCommons@Kennesaw State University. It has been accepted for inclusion in African Conference on
Information Systems and Technology by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@Kennesaw State
University. For more information, please contact digitalcommons@kennesaw.edu.
ERP Pre-Implementation Readiness Assessment Framework: A
Multi Stakeholders’ Perspective

Rahel Tekleselassie1, Lemma Lessa1 and Solomon Negash2

1
School of Information Science, Addis Ababa University, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
2
Department of Information Systems and Security, Kennesaw State University, GA, USA
rahel.tekle10@gmail.com
lemma.lessa@aau.edu.et
snegash@kennesaw.edu

Abstract
These days, there is a growing trend towards ERP systems in Ethiopia. This in turn created an opportunity for
ERP vendors to promote their products in the country. Due to large size and inherent complexity of ERP systems,
organizations are strongly advised to check their readiness prior ERP system implementation. There are some
prior research attempts to develop ERP pre-implementation readiness assessment models and frameworks.
However, extant literature reveal that multi stakeholders’ perspective is not well considered in those prior
attempts. Besides, most of the prior attempts are in the context of developed countries. The purpose of this study
is to develop a framework to evaluate ERP pre-implementation readiness from multi-stakeholders perspective in
developing country context. As a foundation, a set of critical success factors were identified from prior literature.
Interview and survey questionnaire were used for data collection. Based on the result, an ERP pre-implementation
readiness assessment framework is proposed. Feasibility assessment of the proposed framework revealed that the
case company has limitations on a number of dimensions. Accordingly, recommendations are forwarded to
address the identified gaps.

Keywords: ERP, ERP Success, Pre-implementation, Readiness, ERP Pre-Implementation Readiness

1. Introduction
Enterprise applications are systems that span functional areas, focus on executing business processes across the
business firm, and include all levels of management. There are four major enterprise applications: enterprise
resource planning systems, supply chain management systems, customer relationship management systems, and
knowledge management systems. ERP systems integrate business processes in manufacturing and production,
finance and accounting, sales and marketing, and human resources into a single software system (Laudon et.al
2012).It is a key businesses that helps the organizations to gain a competitive advantage by integrating all
business processes, managing and optimizing the resources available. It is not just a software package but an
efficient way of doing business consisting of software support modules where information is flowing between
them and they share a central database.
Many ERP implementations have limited success and the failure rate is high between 60% and 90% (Abeer et.al
2011). One of the reasons for ERP implementation failure is lack of organizational readiness in terms of business
process maturity, cultural, technological and organizational aspects. In addition, in case the implementation
process takes longer than the plan the implementation team loses its motivation (Ptak and Schragenheim
2004).The other reason is difference in interests between customer and organizations that aim to provide the
optimum solutions for business problems and ERP vendors who prefer a generic solution applicable to a broader
market and the resistance of users to change or non-acceptance of new systems (Abeer et.al 2011). Problems
associated with an ERP implementation are often classified into technical and organizational aspects. Technical
aspects include the technology readiness of an organization, the complexity of ERP software, data loss due to the

1
incompatibility of data architectures between the old legacy systems and the new ERP software and inadequacies
of newly redesigned business processes. Common organizational factors may include employees’ resistance to
change, inadequate training, underestimated cost and time of implementation, unwillingness to adopt new
business processes, and strategic view of technology adoption (Slater, 1998, Joshi and Lauer, 1999, Mabert et al.,
2001).
In this research, Ethiopian electric utility is being considered for the case study to examine ERP pre-
implementation readiness issues. This company is one of the biggest companies in Ethiopia with many branch
offices and a huge business process which helped the researchers to see the technical and organizational aspect
along with the multi stakeholders’ perspective. In addition The Company is on the process of implementing ERP
system so it will be a good opportunity to get all the stakeholders together to gather sufficient information for the
study. The main reason that the study focused on pre-implementations is unlike developing countries, developed
ones use ERP systems extensively since 88% of ERP market share is owned by North America and Europe. Such
fact drove ERP vendors to turn towards developing countries - considered as a promising market – to promote
their products (Khalifa et.al 2015). Now a days Ethiopia is one of the developing countries in which organizations
implementing ERP system with the purpose to survive in a marketplace and gain a competitive advantage. This
created a golden opportunity for ERP vendors to promote their packages as if they are providing the magic tool
for business diseases but most vendors do not apply a comprehensive study before adopting such technology to
surf for pre-required infrastructure and capabilities especially in developing countries (Khalifa et.al 2015).
Hence as a developing nation, before implementing any large scale software projects, the researchers believe that
it is advisable to know the readiness level of companies for the intended projects before any information systems’
investments. According to Nazir et al. (2013), On a study to measure ERP implementation readiness in small and
medium enterprises, as the failures of ERP implementation is still considered quite high, they proposed a self-
assessment of open source ERP implementation readiness which focused on the pre-implementation aspects of
ERP. In addition to the above, previous studies report unusually high failure in ERP projects. Thus, (J. Razmi et
al., 2008) recommend that it is necessary to perform an assessment at the initial stage of an ERP implementation
program to identify weaknesses which may lead to project failure. Decision makers are also urged to investigate
the readiness of businesses to move into automated and integrated business activities and also paying attention to
user involvement and acceptance in advance is a critical issue for successful ERP implementation (Khalifaet.al
2015). Therefore, based on the above reviewed facts it is necessary to perform a readiness assessment at the initial
stage of an ERP implementation project to identify weakness areas which may encounter the project with failure
and to measure readiness level of companies for the intended projects.

2. Research Gap
The researchers have tried to review recent literature on the ERP readiness assessment frameworks to show what
other researchers have published on the problem, what gaps of knowledge still exist, and what additional research
needs to be done. The following are researches that have been done on this area and their gap. (Ahmadi et al.
2014) developed Strategic Framework for Achieving Readiness in Organizations to Implement an ERP System by
selecting three strategic issues and critical factors under the issues which are Organizational readiness(
Organization strategically readiness, Organization structural readiness and Organizational readiness for doing
required planning), Social readiness( Organization cultural readiness, Achieving right user intention for
interacting with ERP system and Achieving decent level of communication inside the organization)Technical
readiness( Choosing proper application for implementation, Achieving proper IT capability in organization,
Providing proper IT infrastructure in organization and Managing organization information properly).A research
by Nizar, et al (2013) was conducted to formulate the framework of self-assessment of open source ERP
implementation readiness, which focused on the ERP pre-implementation aspects. The proposed ERP
implementation readiness assessment framework was developed using the Fuzzy-based ANP (Fuzzy ANP), where
the examined readiness factors are grouped into three categories, namely project management, organizational, and
change management readiness. Another research done by (Shiri, S et.al 2014) was to identify and prioritize
organizational readiness factors for implementing ERP based on organizational agility. This study extends

2
McKinsey 7S model (strategy, structure, systems, skills, style, staff, and shared values) to 9S (7S+ self-evaluation
and supportive factors).
Ptak and Schragenheim (2004) suggested an Enterprise Resource Management (ERM) assessment checklist with
twenty-five questions. The readiness of an organization on implementing an ERP system is scored in terms of a
number of criteria each one varying in a range between zero and four. Despite the fact that this research can be
considered as one of the important ones on assessing the readiness of an organization for successful
implementation of ERP, this approach has some shortcomings. For instance, the approach has considered
customer orientation and effective implementation of 6 Sigma as main factors affecting successful
implementation of an ERP system whereas factors such as IT infrastructure, the degree of business processes
maturity and their integration have been ignored. (Shafaei et al, 2008)
The main factors affecting the implementation of ERP in an enterprise and suggested a ranking mechanism
whereby the readiness of an enterprise can be assessed in terms of a number of different aspects. One of the works
mostly related to this research belongs to Wongnum et al. (2004) who developed a framework to assess the
readiness of an enterprise for implementing an ERP system. The project called BEST (Better Enterprise System
implementation). It is a Process-based Model for Organizations (PMO). They considered three processes co-
existing and interacting in an enterprise system implementation project and called them dimensions. The level of
maturity of each dimension indicates the degree of maturity (Shafaei and Dabiri, 2008) or alignment between
different dimensions in the reference framework. The dimensions are the design and tuning of a new enterprise
system which includes project management, implementation process and permanent business processes. The
elements of the model are called aspects which include strategy and goals, management, structure, process,
knowledge and skills and social dynamics which refers to the behavior of people. Despite the fact that the
proposed approach was claimed to be a good framework for assessing the readiness of an enterprises, the authors
opt for further investigations to provide more comprehensive aspects and dimensions whereby the readiness of an
enterprise to implement ERP systems can be assessed effectively plus its done 14 years ago which is difficult to
apply it on current situations. Zewdu (2016) in his study, ERP Pre-implementation readiness evaluation issues
were discussed using critical success factors as a starting point and finally framework for Evaluation of ERP Pre-
Implementation Readiness was developed on the case company. This was one-time survey conducted using
questionnaires. As future work the author recommended the framework could be improved if the study can
include consultants, clients and vendors so that we can assess the internal reliability, validity and perceived value.
While having all this prior studies there is still the need for developing new readiness assessment framwork.one of
the reason is that the studies are done in the previous years with different context and on a limited amount of
factors but now a days many new additional CSFs are there and incorporating them will result in a
multidimensional measuring readiness assessment framework. Besides, most of them are done on the context of
developed nations depending on the selected critical success factors on limited stakeholders of the system which
can’t be applicable for countries like Ethiopia because companies in our country do not have a stable and same
way of doing business like developed countries. In addition as we can see from the recent reviewed literatures two
of them are prepared for the developing nations context but the one research done in Tanzania by Mdima et.al
(2017) proposes a practical model for assessment of pre-implementation of an enterprise in Tanzania prior to
implementation based on success factors related to business -Information technology alignment which does not
incorporate multi stakeholders’ perspective and a research done by (Zewdu 2016) in our country proposes ERP
pre-implementation readiness assessment framework based on selected CSF depending organizational, technical
and cultural perspectives and finally the researchers suggested that as future work to include client, vendor and
consultants perspective to make the framework measure the readiness of the company from multi stakeholders’
perspective. This shows that comprehensive studies and systematic studies on ERP pre - implementation are
missing in developing countries. Since assessing the readiness of the company for ERP implementation is critical
for the successful implementation the researchers believe that it’s better to assess it from multi stakeholders’
perspective which I plan to do my research on.

3
3. Research Design
The purpose of this research is exploring the phenomena in a new light based on theoretically identified factors
from different literatures. Exploratory studies are practical if we wish to clarify our understanding of a problem
(Saunders et al., 2000). (Robson, 1993) describes exploratory studies as a method of finding out what is
happening; to seek new insights; to ask questions and to assess phenomena in a new light. The general approach
of this research is design science case study approach in which both quantitative and qualitative methods are used
to collect and analyze data. According to (yin 2003) Case study method is best fit for exploratory nature of study
since the purpose of this paper is exploratory study using case study approach will be appropriate to answer the
research question.
In this study Research process map is defined as a serious of steps that are going to be followed throughout the
research process to develop the ERP pre-implementation readiness assessment framework as well as to validate
the framework by measuring the readiness of the company. It starts with problem identification and then by
reviewing literatures the problem is clarified likewise it goes all the way to the validation of the framework.in this
study 51 CSFs are identified with extensive literature review and those selected factors are categorized under
different stakeholders’ perspective the validation of CSFs has been conducted based on criticality and relevance to
pre-implementation stage. Deleting /adding or modifying of identified CSFs has been done in the process. Finally,
the framework will be developed and validating the framework will be conducted by measuring the readiness of
the case company using the proposed framework.
Purposive sampling technique is used. In this study the sample frame is EEU’s head office staffs In case study, the
sample units must have the potential and richness in information to be key informants for the study. First ERP
project key stakeholders of the company for this project have been identified. These members are composed from
different departments. Target stakeholders for the survey are divided under five groups to see multi stakeholder’s
perspectives. To study organizational perspective the survey addresses mainly top managements, for the technical
perspective two side technical stuffs of the company have been addressed which are application and infrastructure
technical stuffs, for consultant perspective SI ERP consultants hired by the company are the targets, for the
vendor’s perspective tech Mahindra Indian company agents who implement SAP solution for the company is the
target samples and finally for the user perspective purposely selected different level of system users have been
addressed. Fifteen individuals were selected as respondents for the survey questionnaire to assess organizational,
technical and user perspective and for consultants and vendors perspective one representative individuals for each
have been addresses through interview respectively. These individuals are selected as key informants and
respondents based on their involvement, exposure and role in the ERP project and functional role in the company.
A detailed and focused literature review has been done to understand more about Enterprise Resource Planning
concepts and ERP implementation framework with a central issue of identifying critical factors, questionnaire
used to extract the view of multi stakeholders on ERP pre-implementation readiness assessment. For this study
primary and secondary questionnaire have been prepared. The primary questionnaire is distributed for purposely
selected experts in the case company to identify the CSFs that are critical and relevant to pre-implementation
stage. Based on the result of the first questionnaire which is on the basis of identified CSFs the second survey
questionnaire prepared to validate the framework by measuring the readiness level of the case company. Interview
has been used for selected and small number of stakeholders’ of the system. Specifically to assess consultants and
vendors perspective one representative individuals for each have been selected as respondent to extract use full
information. Using these instruments important data have been collected in order to answer the research question.
In most research results are interpreted from the quantitative perspective of the research process that can generate
effective outputs. Each case at the qualitative and quantitative case is processing on its own phase independently.
By employing SPSS20, the quantitative data analyzed using frequency and mean. The data collected by interview
interpreted accordingly. For primary quantitative data analysis both mean and frequency analysis is used. To
select CSFs relevant for Pre-implementation stage by using frequency analysis CSFs above the valid percent 50%
are taken as relevant for the pre-implementation stage. Valid percent is taken not to consider the null values. mean
analysis is used for validating the criticality of those selected CSFs and rating the mean value above 3.6 is taken
as relevant CSF since 3.6 is round to 4 and as the value 4 &5 are critical and very critical respectively. Which

4
means only critical and very critical value is taken to identify criticality of CSFs for pre-implementation stage.
For secondary quantitative data analysis mean is used and the qualitative data interpreted accordingly.

4. Result and Discussion

The CSFs identified from different stakeholder’s perspective are fifty-one. Participants were asked to group CSFs
into three ERP implementation stages which are the pre-implementation, implementation and post-
implementation since the focus of this research is the pre-implementation stage CSFs grouped under this stage are
taken from the analysis result. Based on the analysis the CSFs above the valid percent 50% are taken as relevant
for the pre-implementation stage. So, 37 CSFs are identified as relevant and the remaining 14 are under the
margin in which the factors are believed to be relevant on the stages other than the pre-implementation stage. The
identification process is not yet done on this stage their criticality is also measured and the factors are also filtered
again. According to the respondents rating the mean value above 3.6 is taken as relevant CSF since 3.6 is round to
4 and as the value 4 &5 are critical and very critical respectively. Based on the result CSF >= 3.6 are 35 which are
taken as critical factors for pre-implementation stage and the left 2 are not critical. The validation procedure has
indicated that the majority of the CSFs are critical at the pre-implementation stage. Based on the analysis result of
primary questionnaire the CSFs are identified on the basis of criticality and appropriateness for pre-
implementation stages and those identified CSFs categorized under five main stakeholder’s perspective which are
going to be elements for the conceptual framework. The following framework is proposed based on the result.
The proposed conceptual framework contains multiple stakeholders’ perspective that can contribute to measure
the readiness level of the company to implement ERP system. As shown in the figure 1, the arrow from each
perspective pointed to ERP pre-implementation readiness which is to mean that if companies can measure their
readiness from all this multiple perspective they can be ready to successfully implement ERP system. Under the
five main perspectives there are list of CSFs in which companies can check their level of readiness by using them
as a measuring point (I.e. By checking if the company fulfilled them or not before implementing the ERP
system).For vendors perspective according to Ethiopian context its illegal for companies to contact the vendors
before signing a contract therefore to check the readiness from vendors perspective they can check those details
based on the listed CSFs under vendors perspective from companies bids document.

5
Figure 1: Proposed conceptual framework to assess ERP pre-implementation Readiness

ERP pre-implementation readiness assessment framework has been developed by different researchers depending
on different factors. (Nizar A., et al 2013) proposed ERP implementation readiness assessment framework that
was developed using the Fuzzy-based ANP (Fuzzy ANP), where the examined readiness factors are grouped into
three categories, namely project management, organizational, and change management readiness. (Ahmadi et al.
2014) developed a new approach for assessing the ERP readiness in organization by considering casual
relationships between influential factors. The approach enables an organization to evaluate its ERP
implementation readiness by considering two issues: (1) how the factors influence each other and (2) how they
contribute on overall readiness. (Ahmadi et.al.N.D) presents a Strategic Framework for Achieving Readiness in
Organizations to Implement an ERP System developed by selecting three strategic issues and critical factors

6
under the issues which are Organizational readiness, Social readiness and Technical readiness. Similarly (Zewdu,
2016) conducted a study in Ethiopia to investigate ERP Pre-implementation readiness using parameters
(constructs) such as technical, organizational, and cultural in the context of Dashen Bank Share Company with the
view to develop a framework for evaluation of ERP Pre-Implementation readiness and design a solution
framework to address those issues.
The previous farmworkers or studies conducted are in the context of developed countries and does not contain
multi-stakeholders’ perspective. It’s clear that there is a gap in integrating different perspectives in to a single
study. In addition, there is one single study in Ethiopia regarding this issue but not yet comprehensive. Therefore,
the newly proposed conceptual framework in this study believed to fill the gap identified in a various ways. First
it is done on the contest of developing country in Ethiopia and nowadays companies in this country are largely
implementing ERP system therefore they can use this framework to measure their readiness for implementing the
system. Secondly it contains five main perspectives that make it different and more comprehensive comparing to
the previous studies done regarding the issue. It is also different from previously done local study by (Zewdu,
2016) through adding three perspectives that has not been addressed before which are users, consultants and
vendors perspective. This additional perspective will help companies to measure their readiness from multiple
ways and lead to a successful ERP system implementation. The last thing that makes this conceptual framework
different is it is validated in the case company. This indicates that any company can customize the framework to
its context and measure its readiness level before implementation of ERP system.

5. Conclusion
Ethiopian Electric Utility (EEU) was considered as a case organization to evaluate the readiness from
organizational, technical, user, consultant and vendor perspective to implement ERP. In order to answer the
research questions, critical success factors were identified from literature. From total of 51 CSFs, 37 CSFs were
found relevant to assess ERP pre-implementation readiness. The proposed conceptual framework is believed to
fill the knowledge gap identified in literature two ways: (a) First it is done on the contest of developing country
and nowadays companies in developing countries are largely implementing ERP system. Hence, they can use this
framework to measure their readiness for implementing the system; (b) Second it contains five main perspectives
that make it different and more comprehensive as compared to related previous studies. The conceptual
framework is also validated in a case company. This indicates that any company can customize the framework to
its context and measure its readiness level before implementation of ERP system.
Using survey questionnaire and interview the researchers assessed the readiness level of the case company from
five perspectives. Organizational perspective was one of the perspectives which contain 27 measuring CSFs.
According to the result the researchers concluded that the organization were successful on CSFs like Top
management support and commitment, experienced project manager leadership, empowered decision makers,
Good project scope management, Project management , Adequate ERP system selection, Organizational fit for
ERP , The use of ERP implementation consultant, Business process re-engineering, Management of expectation,
Project team composition/team skill and competency, Interdepartmental cooperation , team work, motivational
factors to implement ERP system, Clear vision, goal and objectives of the ERP system, Business plan and long
term vision, a formalized project approach and methodology and formalized project plan /schedule. In the
contrary the organization revealed Gap on CSFs like training for different user group, dedicated resource, Steering
committee Careful change management, organizational culture /cultural change /political issues, focus on user
requirement, vendor/customer partnership and managing consultants.
When we see the organization readiness from technical perspective organization were successful on CSFs like
Empowered decision makers, training for different user group, dedicated resource, Steering committee, IT
department capability, Communication among the implementation team members, Team work, Minimal
customization of packages, Data and information quality, reducing trouble shooting-project risk, Implementation
strategy and Formalized project plan /schedule. In the contrary the organization revealed gaps on points like
Adequate ERP system selection, Focus on user requirement, Organizational culture /cultural change /political
issues. When we see the organization readiness from the user perspective on all of the measuring CSFs which are

7
Training for different user group, Interdepartmental cooperation, Team work, Communication, Business process
re-engineering and Focus on user requirement they are successful since the result gain from the survey indicate a
positive result.
The consultant perspective of this study addressed through interview. The representative of the consultants’
response shows that the organizations’ is successful on measuring CSFs like The use of ERP implementation
consultant, business process re-engineering, managing consultants, Focus on user requirement, Implementation
strategy, communication among the implementation team members and Team work. On the other side negative
result is gain from the response on measuring CSFs like Minimal customization of packages, Integration of
business planning with ERP planning, Formalized project plan /schedule, Good project scope management and
formalized project approach and methodology.
Vendor perspective of this study is also addressed through interview. Three measuring CSFs are categorized
under this category namely On-going ERP vendor support, Organizational fit for ERP and Minimal customization
of packages. The respondent confirmed that implementing ERP system is a life-long commitment and requires
continuous investments in adding new modules and upgrading the system they are giving any support that is
needed through the implementation process. The organization is successful on organizational fit for ERP since
they selected package which can feet the other business process. From the response gap has been identified on
minimal customization of package.

6. Recommendations
The findings can support the case company to consider and fill the gap that has been identified through measuring
its readiness level. Except the user perspective on the remaining four perspectives which are organizational,
technical, consultant and vendors perspective gaps have been identified on many of the measuring CSFs therefore
the company should take this seriously and have to make correction so as to successfully implement the integrated
system.
The implementation of the ERP system in the company resulted in dalliance because before going to the
implementation process the concerned bodies didn’t check the readiness level of the company from different
dimensions. Even if it has fulfilled some of the requirements there is still a gap. Therefore depending on the
findings the researcher recommends that each stakeholder to check and make correction on the gaps. Depending
on the findings concerned stakeholders who are the top managements from organizational perspective, the
application side and infrastructure side technical stuffs from technical perspective, consultants and vendors must
pay a visit to fill the gap identified for successful implementation of the integrated system.
Although most organizations in our country are still in the early stage of ERP implementation, there is also a
growing tendency for companies to adopt ERP to improve their business operations. Before potential benefits can
be realized, an organization needs to transform itself into an ERP-ready organization. However, there are no
adequate models or frameworks to assist organizations on how to be an ERP-ready. Therefore it is recommended
that any organization interested in implementing ERP can use the proposed ERP pre-implementation readiness
assessment framework to addresses all aspects of an organization to attain implementation success.

References
1. Abdel, R. I. (2014). Success Factors in Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Systems Implementation.
2. Abeer, I., ALdayel, M.S., Aldayel A.S and Al-Mudimigh, S. (2011). The critical success factors of ERP
implementation in higher education in Saudi Arabia: a case study.
3. Ahmadi, S., Yeh, C.H., and Martin, R.(n.d). An FCM-Fuzzy AHP Approach to Estimating ERP readiness.
4. Ahmadi, S., Yeh, C.H., and Martin, R.(2014). Strategic Framework for Achieving Readiness in Organizations
to Implement an ERP System.

8
5. Aiman, A.J.( 2015). Enterprise Resource Planning Execution/ Implementation Methodology Classification.
International Journal of Applied Information Systems (IJAIS) – ISSN , 8(5): 2249-0868 Foundation of
Computer Science FCS, New York, USA
6. Anwar, S.& Mohsin, R.(2011).ERP Project Management in Public Sector – Key Issues and Strategies.
Proceedings of the 44th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 2011.
7. Arvidsson, J. & Kojic, D.(2017). Critical Success Factors in ERP Implementation.
8. Ayazi, E. (2013). Critical Success Factors In Enterprise Resource Planning.
9. Barsukova D.(2013). Implementation of Enterprise Resource Planning Systems: Point of View of
Consultants.
10. Boland, R. J., & Tenkasi, R. V.(1995). Perspective making and perspective taking in communities of
knowing. Organization science, 6(4): 350-372
11. Bullen C., Rockart J. (1986). A Primer on Critical Success Factors, in Rockart and Van Bullen, the Rise of
Management Computing, Dow Jones Irwin, Illinois (USA), current and competitive ERP: Evaluate Current
ERP system capabilities and determine how to meet future growth plans. Retrieved January 3, 2018, from
http://www.mpi-group.com
12. Creswell, J. (2003). Research Design: qualitative, Quantitative, and mixed methods approaches, second
edition, Sage publications
13. Davenport, T. (2006). Mission critical: Realizing the promise of Enterprise systems. Harvard Business School
Press: Boston, MA.
14. Deloitte C. (1998). Vision in Manufacturing: Global Report. New York: publisher
15. Dul J. & Halk T. (2008). Case Study Methodology in Business Research. Elsevier Ltd, Oxford.
16. Engidayehu G. (2014). Assessment of Enterprise Resources Planning (ERP) Implementation: The case of
ethio telecom.
17. Esteves, J. & Pastor, J. (Aug 2001). Analysis of Critical Success Factors Relevance along SAP
Implementation Phases. Proceedings of the 7th Americas Conference on Information Systems, pp. 1019 –
1025
18. Esteves J., Pastor J. (2001). Enterprise Resource Planning Systems Research: An Annotated Bibliography,
Communications of the Association for Information Systems (CAIS), vol. 7, article 8, August 2001.
19. Fang L.(2005). Critical Success Factors In ERP Implementation.
20. Hasibuan Z.A. – Dantes, G.R. (2012). Priority of Key Success Factors (KSFS) on Enterprise Resource
Planning (ERP) System Implementation Life Cycle. Journal of Enterprise Resource Planning Studies, l. 2012,
1-15.
21. Hidayanto, A. N., Azani, M. H., Handayani, P. W., & Sucahy, Y.G. (2013). Framework for Measuring ERP
Implementation Readiness in Small and Medium Enterprise (SME): A Case Study in Software Developer
Company.
22. Huang, Z., & Palvia, P. (2001). ERP implementation issues in advanced and developing countries. Business
Process Management Journal, 7(3), 276-284.
23. Hurbean, L.(2008). Issues with implementing ERP in the public administration.Retrieved February 16, 2018,
from http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/14160/
24. Holland, C., Light B. (1999).Critical Success Factors Model for ERP Implementation. IEEE Software,
May/June, pp. 1630-1636.
25. Jagoda, K. (2016), an integrated framework for ERP system implementation.
26. Khalifa, N. & Azab, N. (2015).ERP In Egypt: Real or Hollow Systems?

9
27. Khandewal, V., & Miller, J. (1992). “Information System Study”, Opportunity Management Program, IBM
Corporation, New York.
28. Kock, N., Jenkins A., & Wellington R. (1999). A Field Study of Success and Failure Factors in Asynchronous
Groupware Supported Process Improvement Groups. Business Process Management Journal, 5(3), pp. 238-
253.
29. Laudon, K., & Laudon, J. (2012). Management information systems: managing the digital firm, 12th ed.
Prentice Hall.
30. Lawley, M., Summers, J., Koronios, A., & Gardiner, M.( 2001). Critical Success Factors for Regional
community Portals: A Preliminary Model, Australian and New Zealand Marketing Academy Conference.
31. Lorraine, J.H. (2004). Motivations for Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) System Implementation In Public
Versus Private Sector Organizations.
32. Mdima1, B., Mutagahywa, B., Mohamed, J., & Mahabi, V. (2017). Development of a Practical ERP Pre
Implementation Assessment Model for Organizations in Tanzania.
33. Mdima1, B., Mutagahywa, B., Mohamed, J., & Mahabi, V. (2017). Positioning of the ERP system Pre -
Implementation Assessment in the Enterprise Architecture in Tanzanian Organizations.
34. Mohmed Y. & Mohmed A. (2015), Critical Success Factors for Enterprise Resource Planning Implementation
Success, International Journal of Advances in Engineering & Technology.
35. Moon Y., (2007), Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) a review of the literature, Int. J. Management and
Enterprise Development, Vol. 4, No. 3
36. Motwani, J., Subramanian, R. & Gopala Krishna, p. (2005). Critical factors for successful ERP
implementation: Exploratory findings from four case studies, Computers in industry, 56(6): 529-544.
37. Newell, S., Tansley, C., & Huang, J. (2004). Social capital and knowledge integration in an ERP project team:
The importance of bridging and bonding. British Journal of Management, 15(1), 43-57.
38. Nizar A., Azani M., Wuri P., and Giri Y. (2013). Framework for Measuring ERP Implementation Readiness
in Small and Medium Enterprise (SME): A Case Study in Software Developer Company. Journal of
Computers, VOL. 8, and NO. 7
39. Parr, A., Shanks, G. (2000). A model of ERP project implementation. Proceedings of the 33rd Hawaii
International conference in system sciences, USA.
40. Parr. A. N. & Shanks .G (2000), A Taxonomy of ERP Implementation Approaches.
41. Pramod K. & M.P.Thapliyal (2010).Successful Implementation of ERP in A Large Organization.
42. Pavlovna E., Aleksandrovich Y., Petrovich A. Zhabin & Yuryevna P. (2015). Key Success Factors Analysis
in the Context of Enterprise. Modern Applied Science; 9(5)
43. Razmi,J., Ghodsi,R. & Sangari, M. S.( 2008).A fuzzy ANP model to assess the state of organizational
readiness for ERP.
44. Ross, J., Vitale M. (2000). The ERP Revolution: Surviving vs. Thriving. Information systems frontiers,2,233-
241.
45. Sahay, S., & Robey, D. (1996). Organizational context, social interpretation, and the implementation and
consequences of geographic information systems. Accounting, Management and Information Technologies,
6(4), 255-282
46. Sathish S. (2004), A Stakeholder Perspective Of Enterprise Systems Implementation: A Case Study Of A
University’s Enterprise Resource Planning Project.
47. Seo, G. (2013). Challenges in Implementing Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) system in Large
Organizations: Similarities and Differences between Corporate and University Environment. Working Paper
CISL# 2013-07.

10
48. Shafaei, R.,& Dabiri, N. (2008). An EFQM Based Model to Assess an Enterprise Readiness for ERP
Implementation.
49. Shiri, S., Anvari, A., & Soltani, H.(2014). Assessment of Readiness Factors for Implementing ERP Based on
Agility (Extension of Mckinsey 7s Model).
50. Smiju Sudevan, M.Bhasi, and K.V.Pramod (2014). Interpreting Stakeholder Roles in ERP Implementation
Projects: a Case Study, International Journal of Computer Science and Information Technologies, 5 (3) ,
3011-3018
51. Sintayehu, D. (2014). Success Factors for Implementation of Enterprise Resource Planning System at
Ethiopian Airlines.
52. 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.
53. Stanciu,V. & Tinca, A.( 2013). ERP Solutions between Success and Failure. Accounting and Management
Information Systems,12(4), 626–649, 2013
54. Sue Abdinnour-Helm, A., Mark L.Lengnick-Hall, B., Cynthia A.Lengnick-Hall (2003). Pre-implementation
attitudes and organizational readiness for implementing an Enterprise Resource Planning system.
55. Umble, E. J., Haft, R. R., & Umble, M. M. (2003). Enterprise Resource Planning: Implementation Procedures
and Critical Success Factors. European Journal of Operational Research (146:2), 241-257.
56. Wanjiru,J.K.( 2013). Factors Affecting the Implementation of Enterprise Resource Planning In State
Corporations: A Case Study of Nairobi City Water And Sewerage Company. Institute of Interdisciplinary
Business Research December 2013 5( 8)
57. Wongnum, P.M., Krabbend, AM J., J., Buhl, H., Ma, X., Kenett, R. (2004).Improving enterprise system
support—a case-based approach. Advanced Engineering Informatics 18, 241–253.
58. Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research - design and methods (Third edition), Thousand Oaks, California:
Sage Publication).
59. Yousaf, M.J. (2015). Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Implementation In Pakistani Enterprises: Critical
Success Factors And Challenges. Journal of Management and Research,2 (2), 2015
60. Zewdu, A. (2016). Developing a framework for Evaluation of ERP Pre-Implementation Readiness: The Case
of Dashen Bank Share Company.
61. Zouine, A., & Fenies, P. (2014). The critical success factors of the ERP system project: A Meta-Analysis
Methodology. The Journal of Applied Business Research,2 September/October 2014.

11