section of the study is going to focus on theoretical and empirical review of
various literatures concerning Enterprise Resource Planning at post
implementation as well as Information System success factors of the National
University of Science and Technology. Leedy (2009), postulates that literature
review is the process of examining historic significant studies or company data
that act as a basis for the proposed study. According to Fink (2010) literature
review is a systematic explicit and reproducible method for identifying,
evaluating and interpreting the existing body of recorded work produced by
researchers, scholars and practitioners (Blaxter L, Hughes C and Malcolm T
this chapter a review of the theoretic framework on Information Systems Success
is conducted. While all the information presented in this chapter is neither
conclusive nor exhaustive, the researcher however is of the opinion that the
theoretic framework will represents a fair if not true representation of
reality of the subject of Enterprise Resource Planning post implementation
success factors in tertiary institutions particularly the National University
of Science and Technology. The researcher is going to make references from research
textbooks, Journals, and other relevant sources.
2.1.1 ERP Post
ERP post implementation phase consists of the shakedown phase and the
onward-and-upward phase. In the shakedown phase, after the ERP system goes
live, the ERP system is performance tuned and
integrated for normal use. In the onward-and upward phase, entities use the ERP
systems for day-to-day organisational operations in addition to using it effectively
to its maximum potential (Law, C. C.,
Chen, C. C., & Wu, B. J. (2010); Velcu, 2010).
The post implementation period for ERP systems commences
immediately after the implementation phase of an ERP system. The post implementation
phase offers on-going support such as maintenance, training, and upgrades. This
enables organisations to sustain and prevent any disruptions to the ERP system.
To avert an Information System failure, there is need for continuous support of
the system from top management (McGinnis & Huang, 2007; Salmeron &
Lopez, 2010). Nicolaou and Bhattachanya
(2008) asserted that the maintenance of
the post implementation phase of an ERP system could sustain the long-term
performance gains and efficiencies of the system.
Many organisations upgrade and maintain their ERP systems in the
phase to prevent any disruptions to the daily operations of the business (Ng,
Gable, & Chan,
2002). According to Willis and Willis-Brown (2002), the post implementation
many challenges because the go-live phase signals a new beginning. The
the system continues to be challenging but necessary because the system must be
to satisfy the current and all future business requirements (Muscatello and
Chen, 2008; Wei,
Liou and Lee, 2008).
Impacting ERP success
P., Rapp, B., Ifinedo, A., & Sundberg, K. (2010) tested the plausible
relationships between the constructs of the comprehensive ERP systems success
measurement model in an organizational setup post implementation. Ifinedo, Rapp,
Ifinedo, et al. indicated that the constructs of system quality, service
quality, individual impact, workgroup impact, and organizational impact are
significantly relevant in measuring ERP success post implementation.
Law et al. (2010) asserted that maintenance
and support activities in the post implementation phase are critical elements
for ERP success, and organizations should plan for them in the ERP
implementation phase. Zhu, Y., Li, Y., Wang, W., &
Chen, J. (2010) came up with an integrative model to explain ERP post implementation
success from the technological (implementation quality), organizational, and
environmental (external support) aspects. Zhu et al. results indicated that ERP
implementation quality and organizational readiness (leadership involvement and
organizational fit) significantly influenced post
2.1.3 ERP efficiency,
effectiveness, and benefits.
Somers, & Bhattacherjee, 2007a, 2007b) indicated that ERP systems
provide better efficiency in processing leading to added effectiveness and
flexibility, which could improve profitability, earnings valuation, and competitiveness.
Federici (2009) assessed ERP outcomes (financial performance, management
control, and operating efficiency) as measures of ERP success in the shakedown
phase post implementation. Madapusi and D’Souza (2012) indicated that ERP
systems allowed the organization to attain overall operational performance
enhancement inclusive of information quality, inventory management, and on-time
delivery enhancements. Kanellou and Spathis (2013) showed that ERP
systems provided operational and accounting benefits with regards to cost and
time reduction in addition to increased flexibility.
performance and structure.
Bendoly and Cotteleer (2008)
investigated how organizations and employees react to newly availed rule-structures
that accompany ERP implementation. Bendoly and Cotteleer put forward that if
there is existence of a task-technology misfit, managers and end-users might
circumvent the ERP system rule-structures. Thus to say that management and
system users ought to be computer literate and technologically savvy so as to
embrace the changes in rule structures
that come along with ERP implementation.
Chou and Chang (2008) studied
managerial involvement that affected ERP performance
post-implementation. They indicated that the customisation and organisational
mechanisms significantly affected intermediate ERP post-implementation benefits,
which affected the overall ERP benefits.
Yoon (2009) studied the
organizational citizenship behaviours of employees (altruism,
conscientiousness, courtesy, civic virtue, and sportsmanship) and their effect on
organisational performance (information quality and work efficacy). Yoon showed
that employees’ organisational citizenship behaviours significantly influenced
ERP success and operational success. Velcu (2010) verified the interrelations
between strategic alignment, management of the ERP implementation, process
changes, and the business performance of organizations that implemented ERP
systems. Velcu (2010) found that in the post-implementation phase, the use of the
ERP system improved organisational efficiency, which affected the financial performance.
Ha and Ahn (2013) studied
the impact of organisational support (top management support, competency of the
internal ERP team, user training, and inter-department collaboration and
communication) and continuous improvement on ERP performance post-implementation.
Ha and Ahn showed that continuous improvement, and on-going organisational
support positively influence ERP performance post-implementation. They further
stated that “top management support was found to have continuous significant
importance in the post implementation stage influencing user training,
communication and coordination between departments” (Ha & Ahn, 2013, p.11).
culture, benefits, and knowledge.
Seddon, Calvert, and Yang (2010)
developed an organisational measurement model to measure the benefits of
enterprise systems using the following factors, functional fit, overcoming
organisational inactivity, integration, process optimisation, improved access
to information, and continuous major enterprise systems business improvement
projects. Seddon et al. (2010) results showed that the identified model factors
are important for organisational benefits post implementation.
2.1.6 ERP assimilation.
Liang, Saraf, Hu, and Xue
(2007) examined the effect of top management on the adaptation of ERP systems
post implementation. The study results established that strong top management
beliefs, role, and participation in the post implementation assimilation
efforts resulted in higher ERP assimilation in the organisation.
2.1.7 ERP usage.
Lin (2010) established a model that scrutinised the effects of ERP information
quality, system quality, and top management support on ERP system usage. Lin indicated
that while ERP information quality and ERP system quality impacted ERP system
through user satisfaction and perceived usefulness, top management support
impacted ERP system usage and indirectly through perceived usefulness.
2.1.8 Job and computing
Larsen (2009) investigated
end user computing satisfaction during the post implementation phase in an international
manufacturing organisation. Larsen found that “communication and
decision-making patterns between users and experts locally, and communication
with peers in organisational units other than the respondent’s own –
contributed more consistently to individual end user computing satisfaction”
(p. 666). Larsen’s (2009) study showed that “user training plays a role in
explaining the users’ perceptions of the relevance of the ERP project’s business
objectives for the organisation and for their own jobs” (p. 666).
2.1.9 ERP End
Nah, Tan, and Beethe (2005) asserted that the benefit of an ERP
implementation depends heavily on how the system is operated by end users.
Understanding the relative importance of end users’
success factors in ERP systems can help information technology managers put
emphasis on the leading issues perceived by end users (Hsu, Lai, & Weng,
2008). This is further supported by Peslak and Boyle (2010) who asserted that people
are an important variable in order to come up with a winning ERP strategy. The
end users as the system users are an important element that is critical to the
continued success of an ERP post implementation since the end user contributes
to the efficiency and effectiveness of the system resulting in positive
organisational performance. Hence the need to use the DeLone and
McLean IS success model to evaluate ERP success at NUST.
reaction to ERP and the way they react “could be used to shed new light on why
some ERP implementations are seen as more successful than others and
suggest ways of avoiding failure” (Dery et al., 2006, p. 210). Dezdar and Ainin
(2010) found that the satisfaction of the ERP users with the implemented ERP
system reliability, functionality, flexibility, and user friendliness features
is necessary for the success of an ERP implementation.
ERP systems modular and
integrative characteristics make them a critical factor
and enabler of establishing an efficient and effective organisation where the
capabilities and functionality provide better products and services throughout
organisation (Chou & Chang, 2008). Organisations leverage the knowledge
expertise by using the ERP system capabilities and by capitalizing on the
and expertise of the system users, partners, and participants in the
organisation’s supply chain. Coordination among the different units in the
through the ERP system and the streamlined IT infrastructure are critical in
differential business advantage that is flexible and responsive to the diverse
customer needs (Hsu et al., 2008).
Nah, Islam, and Tan (2007)
indicated that the presence of a learning environment in the organisational
culture positively moderated the impact of enterprise-wide communication on the
success of an ERP implementation. Lee et al. 2010 found “training and education
have a positive effect on ERP perceived usefulness” (p. 280). Chou, Lin, Lu, Chang, and Chou (2014) stated,
“Users have to continue learning after implementation” (p. 19). They argued
that despite training is a necessary condition for ERP post implementation
success, users’ knowledge and
competencies enabled the adaptation between
the ERP system and the users.
Chou, Lin, et al. (2014) stated, “Knowledge
sharing plays an important role in facilitating ERP system usage after ERP
implementation” (p. 19). H. W. Chou, Chang, et al. (2014) found that “post implementation
learning, emphasizing informal communication and knowledge sharing among users,
can facilitate ERP usage” (p. 274). They further stated that “social capital by
virtue of social network ties, trust, and shared vision acts as the resource for ERP knowledge sharing and
transfer, which thereby facilitate the conditions for ERP post-implementation
learning” (p. 274). H. W. Chou, Lin, et al. (2014) argued that effective ERP
system use post-implementation was through knowledge gained from other users.
H. W. Chou, Lin, et al. (2014) revealed that user self-efficacy enabled
employees to share knowledge.
2.2.0 ERP Risk factors.
Peng and Nunes (2009) issued
an array of different ERP risks post-implementation. Peng
and Nunes’ (2009) study revealed that the organisational (processes and
risks cause ERP system failure in the post-implementation phase. Tsai, W. H., Lee, P. L., Shen, Y. S.,
& Yang, C. C. (2009) studied the organisational
risks that affect ERP performance improvement level
post-implementation due to ERP implementation problems. Tsai et al. revealed that
lack of top management participation, the firm’s policies and process,
are amongst the top organisational environment risk factors that affect ERP
performance post- implementation.
Singh, & Pereira, 2010) studied the role of human related risks such as
psychological, behavioural, incomplete training, and data entry human errors on
the success of an ERP system post-implementation. Singh et al. revealed that
end-users’ resistance to technological change and change management techniques hinder ERP
success. Peng and Nunes (2010) examined the ERP post implementation barriers
and their impact on the operational, analytical, organisational, and technical
risks. Peng and Nunes found that many ERP barriers and risks are interrelated
and originated from the organisational barriers and risks. Pan, Nunes, and Peng
(2011) established that the organisational change and human associated risks
led to ERP failure post implementation.
2.3 Higher Education ERP Implementation CSFs
(2005) reviewed current ERP research literature and created a listing of 29
success factors after noticing the shortage of research on CSF relating to
factors were applied to a university ERP implementation study to determine
their criticality in the tertiary academic environment. The study was bounded
by a framework which consisted of six elements: (a) strategic factors, (b)
organizational context, (c) ERP system quality, (d) ERP implementation quality,
(e) ERP project scope, and (f) user satisfaction and use. Citing Yin (1994),
Nielsen selected case study research methodology for the university study and
utilised pre- and post-implementation interviews of administrators, staff and
students as the primary means of data collection.
2.4 Observation Gap
view of related literature, the study portrayed that in the post Implementation
phase, there is consistent need to conduct maintenance of the ERP and training
of end users to ensure efficiency and effectiveness of the whole Accounting
information system. The reviewed literature highlighted among other things that
training is a
necessary condition for ERP post implementation success, users’ knowledge and
competencies enabled the adaptation between the ERP system and the users thus
contributing positively contributing to the net system benefits.
Top management support was
found to be a significant factor in ERP success, having continuous significant
importance in the post implementation stage influencing user training,
communication and coordination between functional areas in an entity and
contributing to ERP assimilation by end users.
Kronbichler, Ostermann and
Staudinger, (2010) stated that ERP success can be multifaceted and challenging
to measure; thus evaluating the success of the ERP system has been a focus of
many ERP studies. An analysis of the ERP literature revealed that researchers
used different approaches to measure the success of an ERP system. Some
researchers investigated the benefits or success of an ERP system using financial
indicators, organizational performance, service quality, and customer
satisfaction as measures of ERP success.
The literature review
identified the significant dimensions for determining ERP success, which
consist of information quality, system quality, self-efficacy, service quality,
learning and training, ERP knowledge, individual impact, workgroup impact,
organizational impact, and management support.