Intended learning outcomes: Describe factors that influence individual acceptance of ERP software.
It is not easy to quantify the success of implementing an ERP software package. Figure 9.3.1.1 has already shown that success should not be measured against explicitly worded corporate objectives, since these are influenced by the logistics used, the product design process, and factors outside the company’s control, rather than by the software. One study [Mart93] adopted “PPC acceptance” and “Range of PPC implementation” as its measured variables. Here, PPC means PPC software and, more broadly, ERP software. Consequently, it is better to speak of the acceptance and range of implementation of ERP software below. Many of the factors can as well be transferred to SCM software. The study was carried out in 100 firms. 900 people were surveyed, particularly those who regularly work with the software. Analysis of the questionnaires revealed extremely high acceptance of ERP software at the individual level: The people questioned felt that the package more or less met their expectations. Figure 9.3.2.1 shows the factors that influence individual acceptance.
Fig. 9.3.2.1 Factors that influence individual acceptance of ERP software. (From [Mart93]).
Under personal features, education, vocational training, experience, and position within the company had no significant influence over the individual acceptance of ERP software, whereas it was affected by general data processing knowledge and experience and the support of colleagues.
Of the factors that influenced the support for employees during implementation, the duration and breadth of training, satisfaction with the training, and the opportunity for participation all had significant influence over acceptance, which rose steadily as the number of days of training increased. No “saturation point” was identified, even with a high number of training days ([Mart93], p. 102). It also appears that certain deficits in the software can be overcome with the aid of training.
The most important factors appeared to be information on the reasons for implementing ERP software, combined with cooperation between departments, planning and organization, and the time available out of normal daily work. The extent to which the data had to be revised and, unexpectedly, supported from senior management appeared to be much less important.
For the user’s opinion of the ERP software, the most important factor was whether the individual agreed that the adopted software was generally suitable for his or her own work. Work psychology concepts expressed by the scope for action also played a central role. This means that users are given the freedom to decide the order in which they perform their tasks and the sequence of activities within each task, even after implementation. On the other hand, the layout of screens and lists and, with the exception of error messages, other components associated with user friendliness (help functions, familiarization period, error correction) appeared to be less important.
To summarize, the reasons for implementation, good training, freedom of choice in work, and suitability for an employee’s own work are all important factors in the acceptance of an ERP software package.
The range of implementation of the ERP software was then identified with reference to the factors of “time since implementation started,” “number of functions implemented,” and “degree of distribution.” For the first factor, the sobering result from the questionnaire was an average time of 4.3 years, even though all the companies questioned were either in the process of implementation or had just completed this phase. The number of functions implemented was derived by counting the number of modules, such as Sales, Stockkeeping, and so forth. Thirteen such functions were implemented on average. The degree of distribution was calculated by dividing the number of people working with the ERP software by the total number of people working in the operational departments. The range of implementation was derived from the combination of the three values.
Continuation in next subsection (9.3.2b).
Course section 9.3: Subsections and their intended learning outcomes
9.3 Factors for Successful Implementation of ERP Software and SCM Software
Intended learning outcomes: Explain possibilities and limitations of the IT support of planning & control. Disclose factors that influence individual acceptance and the range of implementation of ERP software.
9.3.1 Limitations of the IT Support of Planning & Control
Intended learning outcomes: Explain the influence of ERP or SCM software on the extent to which corporate objectives are fulfilled.
9.3.1b Possibilities of the IT Support of Planning & Control
Intended learning outcomes: Disclose why objectives aimed at improving the company’s performance can only partly be affected by the ERP or SCM software. Identify situations where ERP or SCM software can be used to good effect.
9.3.2 Factors That Influence Individual Acceptance of Implementation of ERP Software
Intended learning outcomes: Describe factors that influence individual acceptance of ERP software.
9.3.2b Factors That Influence the Range of Implementation of ERP Software
Intended learning outcomes: Disclose factors that influence the range of implementation of ERP software. Differentiate between important factors and less important factors.
