| This study examines the critical success factors for implementing Enterprise Resource Planning systems in the framework of classical management theory. Sneller (1986), in an earlier study, identified critical success factors in the implementation of materials requirements planning systems (MRP). Since the Sneller study, software vendors have enhanced the functionality of MRP systems, first by developing manufacturing resource planning systems (MRP II) and subsequently by developing enterprise resource planning systems (ERP). As a result of expanded functionality, implementation of such systems affects a much wider portion of the business enterprise than operations and logistics. ERP systems are complex and expensive to implement. This study will examine critical success factors for ERP systems implementation suggested in the Information Systems and ERP literature. Sneller's work on MRP surveyed material managers, as MRP dealt with their functional areas of responsibilities. This study surveys a wider range of top functional managers to reflect wider organizational impact of the expanded functionality of ERP. Eight implementation projects were examined. This study uses a six dimensional view (William H. DeLone & McLean, 1992) of success compared to the two dimensional view of success used by Sneller.; The purpose of this research is to investigate the critical success factors for a successful ERP implementation. Additional questions that will be investigated are: (1) Are the company's specific goals for embarking on an ERP project related to project success? (2) Is prior organizational experience with a major systems implementation (such as MRP or MRP II) a critical success factor? (3) Does an ERP system lead to competitive advantage, or is it a competitive necessity?; The study finds that the experience of the project manager, quantity and quality of training and the effectiveness of a project champion lead to successful implementations. Both successful and unsuccessful firms use practices such as establishment of a project headed by a project manager, training, use of consultants, and control by a steering committee. No evidence was found to support integration of business processing and IT planning, reporting level of project manager, involvement of general management or role of management in reducing user resistance. |
