The critical success factors for ERP implementation: an organizational fit perspective

1. The critical success factors for ERP implementation:an organizational fit perspective Summary of the following paper: Hong, K.-K., and Kim, Y.-G. The critical success factors for erp implementation: An organizational fit perspective. Information & Management, 40, (2002), 25-40. 指導老師: 吳思佩 教授 922638 蔡雅婷 922651 邱思瑜 922621 謝宜庭 922659 江珮儀 912609 江海民 911922 楊佳珉

2. Abstract • Explores the root of such high failure rate from an “organizational fit of ERP” perspective. • Define the concept of organizational fit of ERP and examine its impact with ERP implementation. • The survey’s result show that ERP implementation success depends on the organizational fit of ERPand certain implementation contingencies.

3. Introduction • What makes ERP implementation so unsuccessful? • Major course ◎ fit between ERP and the organizational context. • Else ◎ The relative invisibility of the ERP implementation ◎ The organizational resistance to change • Challenge of ERP implementation is the mutual adaptation between IT & User environment.

4. Introduction • Challenge of ERP implementation is the mutual adaptation between IT & User environment. • Define the concept of organizational fit of ERP. • Examine the impact on ERP implementation success between ◎ the organizational fit of ERP & ◎ the moderating roles of ERP implementation contingency variables like ERP adaptation, process adaptation, organizational resistance.

5. Theoretical perspectives 2.1 Organizational fit of ERP • Because the multiplicity of the organization diagram, researchers focused on the fit between specific organization diagram and IS • The congruence(一致) between the original artifact of ERP and its organizational context(背景) and will examine its impact on ERP implementation success empirically

6. Theoretical perspectives 2.2 ERP implementation contingencies • Implementation of a technical innovation is viewed as a dynamic process of mutual adaptation. • ERP vendors recommend process adaptation & discouraged ERP adaptation • User prefer ERP adaptation to process adaptation

7. Research model and hypotheses • Examines the relationship between the organizationalfit of ERP and ERP implementation success • There are three implementation contingencies on this relationship -ERP adaptation level -Process adaptation level -Organizational Resistance

8. Research model Contingency variables -ERP adaptation level -Process adaptation level -Organizational Resistance Organizational Fit of ERP -Data Fit -Process Fit -User Fit ERP Implementation Success -cost -time -performance -benefits

9. Hypothesis1. • Organizational fit of ERP is positively related to ERP implementation success -It is the base relationship in the study • ERP is unable to model some of the adopting firm’s existing procedures • ERP challenge : difficult to handled the ERP generic functionality and the specific organizational requirement • Organizational misfit of ERP requires massive changes

10. Hypothesis2. • There is an interaction effect of the level of ERP adaptation on the relationship between organizational fit of ERP and ERP implementation success

11. Hypothesis2.ERP adaptation • ERP adaptation increase the feature-function fit between ERP and organizational -lower resistance -lower training needs -less organizational adaptation • Glass categorize ERP adaptation types into -customization -extension -modification

12. Hypothesis2. ERP adaptation conclusion When the level of ERP adaptation is low , we expect a stronger the base relationship and expect the opposite when the level of ERP adaptation is high

13. Hypothesis3. There is an interaction effect of the level of Processadaptation on the relationship between organizational fit of ERP and ERP implementation success

14. Hypothesis3 - Process adaptation • ERP implementation may cause radical organizational changes • The existing business process will adapt to fit the standard business of ERP

15. Hypothesis3 - Process adaptation conclusion When the level of Process adaptation is low , we expect a stronger the base relationship and expect the opposite when the level of ERP adaptation is high

16. Hypothesis4. • There is an interaction effect of the level of Organization resistance on the relationship between organizational fit of ERP and ERP implementation success

17. Hypothesis4 - Organization resistance • ERP implementation will affect most of the company’s business functions and influence users directly -triggers a diverse group of overt and covert opponents within the organization

18. Hypothesis4 - Organization resistance • Reason to resist to change stems -Job content was changed -Uncertainty of the new system

19. Hypothesis4 - Organization resistance • Political perspective -Resistance to IT implementation in terms of power distribution misfit of IS -Appears to be primarily applicable for cross-function IS

20. Hypothesis4 - Organization resistance • MRP study • Refuse MRP to infusion within its work due to lack of understanding of MRP

21. Hypothesis4 - Organization resistance conclusion When the level of Organization resistance is low , we expect a stronger the base relationship and expect the opposite when the level of ERP adaptation is high

22. Research method • Sample and data collection - target -questionnaires • Measurement development - interviews with various ERP project managers and member. - validity and reliability.

23. Research method Variable - Implementation success - Organizational fit of ERP - Process adaptation - Organizational resistance ERP implementation success - implementation project success is usually defined in terms of the achievement of some predetermined goals

24. Research method Organizational fit of ERP - organizational fit of ERP in terms of data, process, and output. Implementation contingencies Characteristics of respondent firms - 25 manufacturing firms 、9 non-manufacturing firms - SAP R/3 (14) 、UniERP (13) 、Oracle ERP (6) Bann BPCS (1)

25. Research method ERP implementation success • Is usually defined in terms of the achievement of some predetermined goals Content validity • How comprehensive and representative the items were in creating the scale Reliability • The accuracy or precision of a measuring instrument, i.e. the extent to which the respondent can answer the same question the same way each time Construct validity - Whether the instrument tied to the concepts and theoretical assumption employed

26. Result • A common concern of any regression analysis is the multi-collinearity that may exist among the independent variables . In our model , multi-collinearity is not a problem since we have only one independent variable . • The results from the normal probability plot and Kolmogorov-Smirnov test indicated no violation of normality for the regression model .

27. Testing thebase relationship • Correlation analysis was used for testing the base relationship between organizational fit of ERP and ERP implementation success . • The base relation between organizational fit of ERP and ERP implementation success was significant (r = 0.51 , p<0.002), supporting the hypothesis 1 . • In the regression analysis , it indicated that 24% of the implementation success variance is explained by the organizational fit of ERP

28. Testing thecontingency relationship • According to the regression analysis , we can understand that ERP adaptation is a quasi-moderator (has interaction with predictor & related to either criterion or predictor) of the base relationship between organizational fit of ERP and ERP implementation success , it support the hypothesis 2 . • regression model shows that process adaptation is neither associated with organizational fit of ERP nor associated with implementation success . So we believe that process adaptation is a pure moderator (has interaction with predictor but not related to either criterion or predictor) of the base relationship，supporting the hypothesis 3 .

29. Testing thecontingency relationship • According to the same model , it shows that organizational resistance is negatively associated with both organizational fit of ERP and ERP implementation success . based on these facts , we suggest that organizational resistance is not a moderator of the base relationship.

30. Interpreting the moderating effects • To properly test a contingency hypothesis , it is necessary to display interaction term graphically as well as to examine it mathematically . • See Figs.3 and 4 , we find that the relationship between organizational fit of ERP and ERP implementation success changes from “positive”to“negative”as the level of adaptation (both ERP and process) intensifies

31. Interpreting the moderating effects • in the range of “above the inflection point”, increasing each adaptation has a negativeimpact on implementation success given the same level of organizational fit of ERP . On the contrast , in the range of“below the inflection point“, increasing each adaptation is predicted to have a positive impact on implementation success given the same level of organizational fit of ERP

32. Discussion In the regression model , we found that organizational fit of ERP has a significant effect on ERP implementation success . ERP adaptation ： quasi-moderator(部分影響) Process adaptation ： pure moderator(完全影響) organizational resistance： no moderator effect(沒影響)

33. Organizational fit of ERP • Because the organizational fit of ERP was found to have a significant effect on ERP implementation success , project managers , before embarking on an ERP implementation project , must evaluate organizational fit of ERP and plan for appropriate type and level of adaptation . • To assure organizational fit of ERP , managers can also utilize the proof of concept methodology , where instead of developing and evaluating the exhaustive list of functional requirements , they can focus on the key process features of the organizational in advance of ERP adoption

34. ERP adaptation and Process adaptation • According to the study , we found that there is have a significant threshold interaction effect of ERP adaptation between organizational fit of ERP and ERP implementation success . The impact of ERP adaptation on ERP implementation success was negative in the organizational fit range above 2.84 and positive in its range below 2.84 , this might imply that beyond a certain level of organizational fit ,the higher ERP adaptation only leads to the lower implementation success . • From a resource dependence view , ERP adaptation might be more exposed to threats and risks than process adaptation, because ERP adaptation requires heavier dependence upon uncontrollable resources such as consulting firms or ERP vendors than process adaptation.

35. Organizational resistance • Because organizational resistance did not interact with organizational fit of ERP to explain ERP implementation success but had significant negative association with ERP implementation success , so we believe organizational resistance is an intervening variable(干擾變數) between organizational fit of ERP and implementation success with very marginal effect on improving the predictive validity of the model .

36. Limitation • Limited number of variables for ERP implementation success • Only used perceived project metrics in defining implementation success, leaving out factual aspect of success outcome in the IS research. • Common method bias .

37. Conclusion • The research in organizational fit of ERP has been generally overlooked. While it is recognized that organizational fit of ERP is a critical selection criterion for ERP, the link between organizational fit of ERP and ERP implementation success was not empirically validated. Many vendors just ignore the organizational fit concept and urge blind trust on ERP from their clients.

38. Conclusion • Organizational fit of ERP is indeed critical in explaining ERP implementation success. • Both ERP and process adaptations interact with organizational fit of ERP on ERP implementation success. • ERP and process adaptations are only effective when organizational fit of ERP is relatively low. • Beyond a certain level of organizational fit, more adaptation will only lead to lower implementation success. • ERP adaptation also show a negative direct correlation with implementation success. • Process adaptations maybe a safe choice than ERP adaptation when organizational fit of ERP is low.

39. Conclusion • ERP implementation managers as well as top management should be able to assess the fit between their organization and the target ERP system before its adoption and, once adoption is decided, should measure and manage the impact of ERP and process adaptation from a risk assessment approach as suggested in Brehm et al. to minimize the potential business disruptions and user resistance.