Research Proposal

Student Name:

Student Number:

Major:

Supervisor:
Note the following:

• Although chapter 3 is fairly developed, it does not capture the entire research
onion with the justification on the approperiatness of the methodology choices
made to the nature of the research
• The research workplan is note provided
• Paragraph 3.8 should be written in standard paragraph form avoid ‘’note
making’’ style of writing
• Sampling technique and the research population is not included
• The data collection techniques and procedures is not sufficiently provided
• Data analysis techniques is missing
• Although referencing is in Harvard style, the structure and presentation is poor
(Spacing between each reference is preferable)
However I find this work to a large extent representative of what is expected in a
research proposal. You can therefore use this not as a standard to measure the quality
of your work but as a guide upon which you can develop much better piece of work
which surpurses this example.

Page 1 of 16
Table of Contents
1 Chapter 1: Introduction ............................................................................................ 4
1.1 Research Background ........................................................................................ 4
1.2 Problem Statement ........................................................................................... 4
1.3 Main Research Objective ................................................................................... 4
1.3.1 Sub Research Objectives ............................................................................ 5
1.4 Main Research Question ................................................................................... 5
1.4.1 Sub research Questions .............................................................................. 5
1.5 Significance of the Study ................................................................................... 5
2 Chapter 2: Literature Review ................................................................................... 6
2.1 Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) System....................................................... 6
2.1.1 ERP Systems Benefits ................................................................................. 6
2.1.2 Critical Success Factors (CSFs) .................................................................... 7
2.1.3 Taxonomy of CSFs ...................................................................................... 8
2.2 Multiple Criteria Decision-Making Method (MCDM).......................................... 8
2.2.1 Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) ............................................................... 8
3 Chapter 3: Research Method ................................................................................. 10
3.1 Research Philosophy ....................................................................................... 10
3.2 Research Approach ......................................................................................... 10
3.3 Research Design .............................................................................................. 10
3.4 Research Strategy............................................................................................ 11
3.5 Time Horizon ................................................................................................... 11
3.6 Data Collection and Analysis............................................................................ 11
3.7 Reliability ........................................................................................................ 11
3.8 Validity ............................................................................................................ 11
3.9 Research Limitations ....................................................................................... 11
3.10 Ethical Considerations ..................................................................................... 12
4 Chapter 4: Research Findings ...................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
5 Chapter 5: Conclusions and Recommendations .......... Error! Bookmark not defined.

Page 2 of 16
6 Bibliography .......................................................................................................... 13

Table of Figures
Figure 1 - AHP Model ....................................................................................................... 9
Figure 2 - The Research Onion (Saunders, et al., 2012) .................................................. 10

Page 3 of 16
1 Chapter 1: Introduction
Introduction paragraph missing
1.1 Research Background
In digital epoch, technology is not merely a secondary strategy but a primary strategy to
achieve organizational vision and mission (Sevenpri, 2012). An Enterprise Resource
Planning (ERP) system is a single set of the business solution includes diverse specialized
customizable modules such as finance, sales, human resource (Mazen, 2019), engineering,
procurement and project management (Ali & Miller, 2017). This system implemented
across the organization to support inter and intradisciplinary business processes,
integration and standardization as an enterprise-wide information system (Chung-Hsing
& Yan, 2013).
A study ran by Standish Group indicate that 90 per cent of the SAP R/3 ERP run late
(Moeinedini, et al., 2018) and another study revealed that 93 per cent of the companies
faced with project implementation latency (Ghasemzadeh, et al., 2014). These cost
overrun, behind schedule, abanded and failed projects rates beside their market size were
estimated to be more than $47B in 2011 (Jacobson, et al., 2007) and another study by
PwC projected this market over $60B in 2015 (Holsapple, et al., 2019) make these delay
indices more concerning and considerable. Implementation of an ERP system in only one
organization with $1.7B cost overrun is not neglectable (Levin & McCain, 2014).
This research aimed to assess the gap between scholars and practitioners perceptions of
the critical success factors (CSFs) priorities discerned in the literature review and those
involved with ERP implementation in Iran’s construction industry organization.

1.2 Problem Statement

The general problem is the ERP project failure rate as highlighted in the aforementioned
studies in terms of cost overrun, schedule prolongation, user dissatisfaction, dramatic
scope change and even project termination. However, there are myriad approaches to
face and analyze the root causes of this problem. According to the systematic research
reviews conducted by the scholars (Ali & Miller, 2017) (Loonam, et al., 2018) (Ahmad &
Pinedo Cuenca, 2013) (Holland & Light, 1999), there are critical success factors (CSFs)
beyond the other factors that can influence this failure rate considerably.

1.3 Main Research Objective

This research aims to assess the different practitioners’ perceptions of the priorities on
the factors that influence the successful implementation of an ERP project.

Page 4 of 16
1.3.1 Sub Research Objectives
In alignment with the main objective, there are three interim sub-objectives:
A. Assessing the different perceptions of the reference model factors’ priorities and
the project board members which were involved with the high-level directing and
governing processes.
B. Assessing the different perceptions of the reference model factors’ priorities and
the project management team members which were involved with the
implementation management.
C. Assessing the different perceptions of the reference model factors’ priorities and
the IT team members which were involved with the technical aspects of the
implementation project.

1.4 Main Research Question

This research will be conducted based on the Loonam’s (Loonam, et al., 2018) study and
their prioritized critical success factors (CSFs) list for successful ERP implementation.
Furthermore, the reference framework authors’ group selected the top-ten ranked
factors among the thirty-four studied ones and elaborated them more in-depth and this
research will also focus on these ten selected CSFs. Thus, the main research question will
be:
• What is the practitioners’ perception of the CSFs priorities among the ERP project
implementation in the Iranian construction company?

1.4.1 Sub research Questions

The practitioners in this research refer to the ERP implementation project management
team in the Iranian construction company which is divided into the project board, project
management and IT teams. Thus, the sub-research questions will be:
A. What is the company’s project board perception of the CSFs priorities?
B. What is the company’s project management perception of the CSFs priorities?
C. What is the company’s IT team perception of the CSFs priorities?

1.5 Significance of the Study

This research can reduce the failure rate of the ERP implementation in the
aforementioned scope as well as the neighbouring industries.
In addition, this research can be used as a guideline for the ERP project managers to lead
their project with emphasis on monitoring the status of these factors as an origin of major
threats or opportunities which are known as the risk factors of the project in the project
management nomenclature.

Page 5 of 16
Chapter 2: Literature Review

1.6 Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) System

A rolling wave of incremental movement commenced in late 1970 from Material Resource
Planning (MRP) systems toward more integrated promising software application having
named years later as Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) system. This term coined by the
Gartner Group in the early of 1990 when enough distinctive identifications appeared for
the new computer software industry approach (Jacobs & Weston Jr., 2007).
The considerable amount of the implementation cost of an ERP system project belongs
to the IT infrastructure including data centre, servers and network requirements as well
as user facilities such as PCs and printers which are all needed in the direction real-time
reliable data processing and information storage, retrieval and dissemination
(Pawełoszek, 2015).
An ERP implementation project may long from a few months to several years depending
on a number of factors such as core business processes diversity and cohesiveness,
organization geographical spread, number of users and firm’s readiness (Ram, et al.,
2013). There are basic approaches to ERP implementation including Pilot, there would be
a preferred functional area as a pioneering department for implementation; Parallel, with
extra load for the firm’s user in order to keep both old and new ERP system running
simultaneously; and Big Bang, when the top management accept high risk of shifting over
the new ERP system on the next Monday and turning off the old system simultaneously
(Okrent & Vokurka, 2004). The high failure rate of ERP implementation projects as a
consequence of applying the aforementioned basic approaches and even worse by
considering and comparing ERP implementation project with “Off the Shelf” or “Plug and
Play” software, gradually replaced with specialized ERP implementation methodologies
and frameworks. The new approaches considered and conceptualized an ERP
implementation project as a business project rather than software installation process
(Kraljiđ, et al., 2014).

1.6.1 ERP Systems Benefits

The emergently changing atmosphere of the market environment became more
challenging beside varieties of customers, varying needs, wants and expectations that all
have turned firms to increase information availability, reliability and shorten decision-
making processes in order to make operational, tactical and strategic directions aligned,
effective and efficient. In this regard, the necessity of utilising enterprise systems
considered undeniable (Shao, et al., 2015) (Sevenpri, 2012). However, the foremost
problem which motived the software companies to react was the decentralization of
information in large firms (Davenport, 1998) and the integrity of information from all

Page 6 of 16
aspects of the business as nowadays known as ERP system, was the solution (Bingi, et al.,
1999). In addition to the LMEs, implementation of the ERP systems has been increased
rapidly over recent years (LOH & KOH, 2004) (Zach, et al., 2014).
Numerous researches conducted during this past decade approaching ERP benefits and
affirmed its positive relations into corporate sustainability (Hack & Berg, 2014) innovation
and strategic entrepreneurship (Pohludka, et al., 2018) (Trinoverly, et al., 2018) as well as
productivity and performance (Hitt, et al., 2014) (Hendricks, et al., 2007) (Beheshti &
Beheshti, 2010).
ERP benefits categorized heterogeneously according to organizational realization and its
requirements such as operational, managerial, strategic, IT-infrastructure and
organizational (Shang & Seddon, 2000) (Shang & Seddon, 2002). Another study divided
benefits into automation, innovation and planning divisions (Badewi, et al., 2018).

1.6.2 Critical Success Factors (CSFs)

Depending on the scope of the ERP implementation project, millions of Dollars will be
required to invest in the solution itself as well as side services including IT infrastructure,
training and consultancy (Loonam, et al., 2016). Although this huge amount of Dollars
being spent, evidence from researches reveal that a considerable proportion of the
implementations are not successful (Amid, et al., 2012). These poor performances have
caused studies to focus on factors that are critical for successful ERP implementation
(Loonam, et al., 2018).
One of the most cited (Dezdar & Sulaiman, 2009) research (Nah, et al., 2001) developed
eleven critical success factors for successful ERP implementation. Other highly cited paper
(Finney & Corbett, 2007) identified twenty-six critical success factors for ERP
implementation. Both of them selected factors based on their frequency of repetitions in
the previous articles.
Another research reviewed and analyzed twenty critical success factor investigation
studies to explore thirty-four CSFs (Loonam, et al., 2018). These factors ranked based on
their repetitions among the selected studies. Subsequently, the ten most repeated factor
selected as the most influential CSFs which respectively are:
1. Top management support
2. Change management
3. Project management
4. Communication
5. User training and involvement
6. Business process reengineering
7. Enterprise system selection

Page 7 of 16
 8. Project champion
9. Consultant selection & relationship
This research will be conducted based on abovementioned (Loonam, et al., 2018) findings
and rankings.

1.6.3 Taxonomy of CSFs

In addition to the aforementioned studies on CSFs identification, there are several types
of research focused on the taxonomy of the CSFs from a different point of views.
One review study classified more than thirty CSFs out of previous researchers outcomes
into five management classical functions including planning, organizing, staffing, leading
and controlling (Bradley, 2008). The research put the three project manager, training and
champion factors in the focal point of the successful implementation.
Other review research identified forty-six CSFs through their explorations and named
them under four organization-related, Technological/ERP-related, project-related and
individual-related main headlines (Ram, et al., 2013).
This research will utilize (Markus & Tanis, 2000) classification model which is used by
(Kamhawi, 2007) and (Dezdar & Sulaiman, 2009). The (Markus & Tanis, 2000) model
divided ERP implementation success into two categories of project success and business
success with their own related criteria.
However, this research focused on ERP project implementation success, therefore, its
definition of success narrows down into project implementation success and its related
criterions which are time, cost and scope.

1.7 Multiple Criteria Decision-Making Method (MCDM)

Basically, decision making is a process of differentiating and preferring one or more
course of actions in comparison with the rest of the alternatives. The MCDM is a set of
powerful techniques widely utilized for evaluating and ranking alternatives faced with
multiple criteria especially contradictory ones (Büyüközkan & Ruan, 2008). One of these
methods first introduced by Thomas L. Saaty as the analytic hierarchy process (AHP)
technique approaching prioritizing concerns in planning problems (Saaty, 1980) (Ayağ &
Özdemİr, 2007).

1.7.1 Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP)

Beyond mathematical background of the AHP technique which is part of the AHP’s seven
pillars (Saaty, 2000), it also supports group decision making in terms of involving
individuals into the process of making a decision when their different specializations,
nomenclatures and points of views limited communication channels and efficiency of

Page 8 of 16
team collaborations (Parthasarathy & Sharma, 2014). The AHP technique widely used by
scholars for ERP selection (Ayağ & Özdemİr, 2007), ERP customization (Parthasarathy &
Sharma, 2014) and evaluating ERP development projects (Büyüközkan & Ruan, 2008).
There are three steps for modelling a problem to solve with the AHP technique:
a. Computing the relative importance of the criterion in regard to each other.
b. Computing the relative importance of each alternative in regard to another with
respect to each criterion.
c. Computing the overall priority weight for each alternative.

Figure 1 - AHP Model

Page 9 of 16
2 Chapter 3: Research Method
This chapter will look into the method and methodology which can be applied to do the
research and answer the research questions based on the reference (Saunders, et al.,
2012).

Figure 2 - The Research Onion (Saunders, et al., 2012)

2.1 Research Philosophy

According to the research method reference (Saunders, et al., 2012), positivism research
philosophy will collect data around an observable event and look for relations among the
data to propose kind of low generalisations. Therefore, this research could be considered
as positivism philosophy research.

2.2 Research Approach

Whenever a study aimed to generalize a general model to a specific set of collected data
and support this generalization by the gathered sample data, the research approach
considered as a deductive approach (Saunders, et al., 2012). Thus, this research will be
classified into the deductive approach research group.

2.3 Research Design

This research will use AHP technique as a quantitative research method to analyze the
data gathered through the related questionnaire.

Page 10 of 16
2.4 Research Strategy
The survey will hold through the structured questionnaire and the researcher is
independent of those being researched (respondents).

2.5 Time Horizon

This research is focused on an implemented ERP project which means it is categorized as
cross-sectional research which will focus on a specific phenomenon at a particular time.

2.6 Data Collection and Analysis

This research will conduct based on the data gathered from the whole population.
Therefore, the data collection and analysis will be based on the census results.
Consequently, this research will not use sampling technique. Based on the nature of this
research, primary data will gather through questionnaire and being used for analysis
purpose.

2.7 Reliability
The ability of the measuring device or technique to produce consistent outputs with
either the same inputs over different repetitions or with different operators replications
named reliability (Saunders, et al., 2012). The AHP technique provided with a consistency
ratio index to measure consistency over the answers of the participants. Consistency ratio
below 1.0 indicates an acceptable level of consistency and reliability (Saaty, 2000).

2.8 Validity
Validity concern is about measuring what it has to be measured accurately. There are four
kinds of questionnaire validity:
a. internal or measurement validity
b. content validity
c. criterion-related or predictive validity
d. construct validity
Due to clarification on questions, explore and investigate meanings as well as responses
and explain themes from a different point of views can result in a high level of validity
(Saunders, et al., 2012).

2.9 Research Limitations

It is anticipated that gathering information and filled questionnaire by the senior
participants of the research within the forecasted time frame would be the main
limitation for this research.

Page 11 of 16
2.10 Ethical Considerations
Researchers are ethically obliged to prevent any embarrassment, disadvantageous or
damages through the research processes on behalf of participants either in data
collection, analysis or any other steps of the research (Saunders, et al., 2012). Since the
participant organization has international relationships with the other international
companies, the company’s profiles, as well as data which are all gathered through the
data gathering process, will be treated as the confidential contents to keep the anonymity
of the participants as well as the organization.

Note the following:

• Although chapter 3 is fairly developed, it does not capture the entire research
onion with the justification on the approperiatness of the methodology choices
made to the nature of the research
• The research plan is note provide
• Paragraph 3.8 should written in standard paragraph form Avoid ‘’note making’’
style of writing
• Sampling technique and the research population is not included
• The data collection techniques and procedures is not sufficiently provided
• Data analysis techniques is missing
• Although referencing is in Harvard style, the structure and presentation is poor
(Spacing between each reference is preferable)

However I find this work to a large extent representative of what is expected in a

research proposal. You can therefore use this not as a standard to measure the quality
of your work but as a guide upon which you can develop much better piece of work
which surpurses this example.

Page 12 of 16
3 Bibliography
Ahmad, M. M. & Pinedo Cuenca, R., 2013. Critical success factors for ERP implementation
in SMEs. Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing, Volume 29, pp. 104-111.
Ali, M. & Miller, L., 2017. ERP system implementation in large enterprises – a systematic
literature review. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 3(4), pp. 666-692.
Amid, A., Moalagh, M. & Zare Ravasan, A., 2012. Identification and classification of ERP
critical failure factors in Iranian industries. Information Systems, Volume 37, p. 227–237.
Ayağ, Z. & Özdemİr, R. G., 2007. An intelligent approach to ERP software selection through
fuzzy ANP. International Journal of Production Research, 45(10), pp. 2169-2194.
Badewi, A., Shehab, E., Zeng, J. & Mohamad, M., 2018. ERP benefits capability framework:
orchestration theory perspective. Business Process Management Journal, 24(1), pp. 266-
294.
Beheshti, H. M. & Beheshti, C. M., 2010. Improving productivity and firm performance
with enterprise resource planning. Enterprise Information Systems, 4(4), pp. 445-472.
Bingi, P., Sharma, M. K. & Godla, J. K., 1999. Critical Issues Affecting an ERP
Implementation. Information Systems Management, 16(3), pp. 7-14.
Bradley, J., 2008. Management based critical success factors in the implementation of
Enterprise Resource Planning systems. International Journal of Accounting Information
Systems, Volume 9, p. 175–200.
Büyüközkan, G. & Ruan, D., 2008. Evaluation of software development projects using a
fuzzy multi-criteria decision approach. Mathematics and Computers in Simulation,
Volume 77, p. 464–475.
Chung-Hsing, Y. & Yan, X., 2013. Managing critical success strategies for an enterprise
resource planning project. European Journal of Operational Research, Issue 230, pp. 604-
614.
Davenport, T. H., 1998. Putting the Enterprise into the Enterprise System. Harvard
Business Review, pp. 121-131.
Dezdar, S. & Sulaiman, A., 2009. Successful enterprise resource planning implementation:
taxonomy of critical factors. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 109(8), pp. 1037-
1052.
Finney, S. & Corbett, M., 2007. ERP implementation: a compilation and analysis of critical
success factors. Business Process Management Journal, 13(3), pp. 329-347.
Ghasemzadeh, B., Ansarinejad, A. & Taheri, S., 2014. EVALUATING PRIORITIES AND
CAUSAL RELATIONS AMONG ERP CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTORS UNDER FUZZY
ENVIRONMENT. Vasile Goldis University Press, 24(1), pp. 175-200.
Hack, S. & Berg, C., 2014. The Potential of IT for Corporate Sustainability. Sustainability,
Volume 6, pp. 4163-4180.

Page 13 of 16
Hendricks, K. B., Singhal, V. R. & Stratman, J. K., 2007. The impact of enterprise systems
on corporate performance: A study of ERP, SCM, and CRM system implementations.
Journal of Operations Management, Volume 25, p. 65–82.
Hitt, L. M., Wu, D. & Zhou, X., 2014. Investment in Enterprise Resource Planning: Business
impact and productivity measures. Journal of Management Information Systems, pp. 71-
98.
Holland, C. P. & Light, B., 1999. A critical success factors model for ERP implementation.
IEEE Software, pp. 30-36.
Holsapple, C., Sena, M. & Wagner, W., 2019. The perceived success of ERP systems for
decision support. Information Technology and Management, Volume 20, pp. 1-7.
Jacobson, S., Shepherd, J., D’Aquila, M. & Carter, K., 2007. The ERP Market Sizing Report,
Boston: AMR Research.
Jacobs, R. & Weston Jr., T., 2007. Enterprise resource planning (ERP)—A brief history.
Journal of Operations Management, Volume 25, p. 357–363.
Kamhawi, E., 2007. Critical factors for implementation success of ERP systems: an
empirical. International Journal of Enterprise Information Systems, 3(2), pp. 34-49.
Koh, S., Gunasekaran, A. & Goodman, T., 2011. Drivers, barriers and critical success factors
for ERPII implementation in supply chains: A critical analysis. Journal of Strategic
Information Systems, Volume 20, p. 385–402.
Kraljiđ, A., Kraljiđ, T., Poels, G. & Devos, J., 2014. ERP Implementation Methodologies and
Frameworks: A Literature Review. Belgium, Academic Conferences and Publishing
International Limited.
Levin, C. & McCain, J., 2014. Senate report blasts Air Force for $1.2B logistics system
failure. Air Force Times, p. 5.
LOH, T. C. & KOH, S. C. L., 2004. Critical elements for a successful enterprise resource
planning implementation in small-and medium-sized enterprises. International Journal of
Production Research, 42(17), pp. 3433-3455.
Loonam, J., Kumar, V., Mitra, A. & Abd Razak, A., 2018. Critical success factors for the
implementation of enterprise systems: A literature review. Strategic Change, 27(3), p.
185–194.
Loonam, J., McDonagh, J., Kumar, V. & O’Regan, N., 2016. Top Managers & Information
Systems: ‘Crossing the Rubicon’!. Strategic Change: Briefings in Entrepreneurial Finance,
23(3), pp. 205-224.
Markus, M. L. & Tanis, C., 2000. The Enterprise System Experience—From Adoption to
Success. In: Framing the domains of IT research: Glimpsing the future through the past.
s.l.:s.n., pp. 207-173.

Page 14 of 16
Mazen, A., 2019. Success Factors of Implementing Enterprise Resource Planning Systems
in North American Organizations. Michigan: ProQuest LLC.
Mitra, A. & Neale, P., 2014. Visions of a Pole Position: Developing Inimitable Resource
Capacity through Enterprise Systems Implementation in Nestlé. Enterprise Systems
Implementation, Volume 23, p. 225–235.
Moeinedini, M., Raissi, S. & Khalili-Damghani, K., 2018. A fuzzy fault tree analysis based
risk assessment approach for enterprise resource planning projects A case study in an
Iranian foodservice distributor. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management,
35(5), pp. 1115-1141.
Nah, F. F., Lau, . J. L. & Kuang, J., 2001. Business Process Management Journal. Critical
factors for successful implementation of enterprise systems, 7(3), pp. 285-296.
Okrent, M. & Vokurka, R., 2004. Process mapping in successful ERP implementations.
Industrial Management & Data Systems, 104(8), pp. 637-643.
Parthasarathy, S. & Sharma, S., 2014. Determining ERP customization choices using
nominal group technique and analytical hierarchy process. Computers in Industry, Volume
65, p. 1009–1017.
Pawełoszek, I., 2015. Approach to Analysis and Assessment of ERP System. A Software
Vendor’s Perspective. IEEE, Volume 5, p. 1415–1426.
Pohludka, M., Stverkova, H. & Slusarczyk, B., 2018. Implementation and Unification of the
ERP System in a Global Company as a Strategic Decision for Sustainable Entrepreneurship.
Sustainability, 10(8), p. 2916.
Ram, J., Corkindale, D. & Wu, M.-L., 2013. Implementation of critical success factors (CSFs)
for ERP: Do they contribute to implementation success and post-implementation
performance?. Int. J. Production Economics, Volume 144, pp. 157-174.
Saaty, T. L., 1980. The analytical hierarchy process, planning, priority. Resource allocation.
Saaty, T. L., 2000. The seven pillars of the analytic hierarchy process. ANKARA, TURKEY,
SPRINGER-VERLAG BERLIN, HEIDELBERGER PLATZ 3, D-14197 Berlin, Germany.
Saunders, M., Lewis, P. & Thornhill, A., 2012. Research methods for business students.
Sixth ed. Essex, England: Pearson.
Sevenpri, C., 2012. ERP Implementation Success and Knowledge Capability. Jakarta,
Elsevier.
Shang, S. & Seddon, P. B., 2000. A Comprehensive Framework for Classifying the Benefits
of ERP Systems. s.l., Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS).
Shang, S. & Seddon, P. B., 2002. Assessing and managing the benefits of enterprise
systems: the business manager’s perspective. Information Systems Journal, Volume 12, p.
271–299.

Page 15 of 16
Shao, Z., Wang, T. & Feng, Y., 2015. Impact of organizational culture and computer self-
efficacy on knowledge sharing. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 115(4), pp. 590-
611.
Trinoverly, Y., Handayani, P. W. & Azzahro, F., 2018. Analyzing The Benefit of ERP
Implementation in Developing Country: A State Owned Company Case Study. Information
Management and Technology.
Zach, O., Munkvold, B. E. & Olsen, D. H., 2014. ERP system implementation in SMEs:
exploring the influences of the SME context. Enterprise Information Systems, 8(2), pp.
309-335.

Page 16 of 16