International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 5, Issue 9, September-2014 11

ISSN 2229-5518

Relevance of ERP Implementation and Critical

Success Factors in SMEs of Developing

Countries

Majid Aarabi *1, Hadi Ghafoorian 2, Muhamad Zameri Mat Saman 3

Abstract— Small and medium enterprises (SMEs) with their crucial role in generating employment and supporting trade are encountering numerous challenges. Meanwhile, towards to stay alive in a competitive edge in today’s dynamic business environment, SMEs are improving their usage of information systems (IS) and increasingly implementing of enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems. However, successful implementation and utilization of ERP systems requires adequate attention to a proper and comprehensive implementation framework and considering of significant critical success factors (CSFs) in implementation phases. Expert panel with ten experts and interview instrument was conducted in this research. This study aims to contribute three major goals: to find the required characteristics of SMEs' framework and then propose a conceptual framework and seek the relevance of critical success factors (CSFs) along the four phases of proposed framework for implementation of ERP systems in SMEs of developing countries. These findings aim to saturate the proposed frameworks that can help SMEs of developing countries towards improving the ERP implementation success rate. The case study in Iranian SMEs was used to validation of the final proposed framework.

Index Terms— Enterprise resource planning, small and medium-sized enterprises, critical success factors, conceptual framework, developing countries.

1 INTRODUCTION

——————————  ——————————

HE Information and Communication Technology (ICT) and particularly Information Systems (IS) and Enterprise Re- source Planning (ERP) issues are recently bringing to be the fore- front agenda for improving the poorness of information usage in developing countries [1]. Furthermore, small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) constitute the majority of businesses and are as a proportion of all business and large percentage of both em- ployment and turnover [2-5]. As SMEs includes more than 90% of businesses in many countries, more attention and rigorous re- lated studies are required seriously [6-9]. Due to the inherent dif- ferences between SMEs and large firms, the findings of the re- searches based on large businesses cannot be suited for SMEs [10-13]. Some specific characteristics of SMEs can be counted as: having simple and highly centralized structures that generally chief executive officers (CEOs) are the owners and also makes the most of the critical decisions [14, 15]. SMEs also prefer the employment of generalists rather than specialists [15-19]. Fur- thermore, SMEs tend to plan for short-term rather than long-term strategic. The communication in different levels of organization in SMEs is less complex. They have fewer bureaucratic proce- dures and less inertia for organizational changes [20, 21]. SMEs are usually encountered by lack of technical and expert staffs, and financial and human resources [14]. In SMEs often decisions are made without full awareness of information [22]. In brief, the

————————————————

• Majid Aarabi is an assistant professor in Industrial Engineering Dept., College of Eng., Shiraz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Shiraz, Iran, PH-

+98-9140903448. E-mail: majidnp@gmail.com

• Hadi Ghafoorian is a PhD candidate inDepartment of Finance and Ac- counting, Faculty of Management, University Teknologi Malaysia, UTM

Skudai, Johor, Malaysia

• Muhamad Zameri Mat Saman is an associate professor in Manufactur-

ing & Industrial Engineering Dept., Faculty of Mechanicql Eng., Universi-

ti Teknologi Malaysia, UTM Skudai, Johor, Malaysia

SMEs differ from larger enterprises in various aspects, including their workflow, decision-making process, levels of hierarchy, resources, and corporate culture [5]. Due to the distinctive differ- ences of SMEs and large enterprises, there is a need to study these enterprises separately [10, 13, 23, 24]. ERP systems of SMEs in developing countries, totally, cannot just imitate the model, frameworks and methodologies and also approaches adopted by large counterparts and in developed countries. They need developed, revised or modified frameworks and models to adapt with SMEs' of developing countries' needs and characteris- tics. In spite of this need, there is not adequate study on propos- ing the favorite framework for these enterprises.

The first section of this paper discusses the review on ERP implementation frameworks. This is followed by identification of the required specifications for SMEs' framework and a dis- cussion of the authors' proposed framework. Then the rele- vance of critical success factors (CSFs) along the implementa- tion phased is evaluated. This will be followed by case study results. Finally, conclusion and suggested future research di- rections are presented.

2 CURRENT MODELS AND FRAMEWORKS OF ERP IMPLEMENTATION

There are many proposed models and frameworks for implementing of ERP systems. In this section we are evaluating some of the issues that are more related to ERP implementation in brief, as follows:
Regarding of enterprise-wide of the ERP implementation, most of the proposed model and framework state the required stages to manipulate the planning [25-27]. In the proposed frameworks by these authors, a planning process is involving

IJSER © 2014 http://www.ijser.org

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 5, Issue 9, September-2014 12

ISSN 2229-5518

project planning, financial and other resource planning, and lead- ership roles planning are designed. Chan [27] and Umble et al.'s [28] proposed frameworks begin the implementation process with doing of pre-implementation process. Umble et al. [28] proposed the considering of all factors critical in pre-implementation phase
to insure having a successful implementation. Despite of training
and including of the all staffs and stakeholders in all stages of ERP project in SMEs are a significant factor for successful [29], they proposed the training procedure after installing the hardware and software of the systems. They've also not cleared the CSFs and their relevance with implementation process clearly. The framework proposed by Somers et al. [30] includes some ele- ments such size of the firm, organizational structure, and industry type. The stages of the life cycle to implement of ERP systems are included in their framework. Furthermore, their proposed framework has specified the internal and external elements. They stated the implementation processes and the related elements, but they've not considered the critical factors that affect on successful implementation in each process.
Markus and Tanis [31] proposed a framework to implement of ERP systems in four phases: (1) Project chartering: to make the decisions on business cases and solution constraints, (2) Pro- ject configure and rollout: the system gets up and runs by end users, (3) Shakedown: the implemented system is stabilized and its bugs will be resolved and gets to normal operation, (4) On- ward and upward: maintaining, supporting and updating of the system are included in this phase. They specified the lifecycle of system implementation. Nevertheless, many of the critical factors and the relation of CSFs in any stages of implementation are not cleared.
Parr and Shank [25] proposed a framework includes three phases: planning, project, and enhancement. The focus of their framework is on project implementation phase that is divided to five sub-phases: set-up, re-engineering, design, configuration and testing and installation. They tried to find the relation of the CSFs to the phases of implementation. They focused on literature of large companies to find the CSFs and used two case studies in order to do comparision to find their similarities and differences.
Ehie and Madsen [32] presented a five-stage ERP imple- mentation model includes: "project preparation", "business blue- print", "realization", "preparation" and the last phase, that is "go live and support". The framework includes the strategic enter- prise architecture approach and life cycle processes of implemen- tation. Nevertheless, the CSFs of SMEs and their relevance with implementation stages are not considered in this framework. Fur- thermore the implementation methodology is not simplified ade- quately.
Chan [27], proposed a theoretical framework concerning critical success factors, organizational environment, and internal and external stakeholders. His framework divided in three major phases: pre-implementation, implementation and post-
implementation processes. During the implementation process, the framework suggests three major activities to be carried out: the business process reengineering process, the management of organizational changes, and the management of ERP project. The mentioned classified CSFs are not for SMEs and the related CSFs in each major three phases of implementation are not specified clearly. Nevertheless, the framework is not simplified enough for SMEs to follow it as implementation and documentation of ERP in these enteprises.
The current moldels and frameworks are generally focused on large firms in developed countries and don't consider the particular conditions and characteristics of SMEs in developing countries. Meanwhile the present framework doesn't include all elements, phases and approaches that are needed to implement of ERP systems and none of them relates CSFs of SMEs to the phases of implementation. The purpose of this study is proposing of the framework for implementting of ERP in SMEs. The authors believe that this framework fits the SMEs' characteristics and it can be used as guideline to help SMEs of developing countries to have better implementing of ERP systems and improve their success rate.

3 RESEARCH METHOD

This study tries to response to the following three re- search questions:
1- What are the required characteristics for SMEs' frame-
work?
2- What is the suitable conceptual framework for ERP im- plementation in SMEs of developing countries?
3- How is the relevance of CSFs along the proposed phases of implementation methodology?
In order to develop a suitable framework for SMEs, certain characteristics should be considered. Expert panel method using interview instrument was used to explore the required specifica- tions of SMEs framework and it was continued to propose a comprehensive conceptual framework for ERP implementation in SMEs of developing countries.
As the next purpose of this study, the relevance of the CSFs and the phases of implementation methodology are surveyed. Table 1 shows the tabular summaries of the interviewed expert specifications and background.
Regarding lack of experts in SMEs of developing countries for ERP field, it seems that ten experts are enough for a survey in this kind of research as were done in similar researches [25, 33]

IJSER © 2014 http://www.ijser.org

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 5, Issue 9, September-2014 13

ISSN 2229-5518

Table 1. Expert specifications

Current Position Company type Industry sector Experience

(Year)

Planning manager Medium Manufacturing 9
Head master of system develop- ment and support
Small Service 7
Executive director Medium Manufacturing 8


Planning manager Medium Manufacturing 8
Chief manager Small Service 12

Business development manager Medium Manufacturing 14
System & planning manager Medium Manufacturing 10

Financial system designer Medium Manufacturing 9
System Analyst Medium Manufacturing 13
System developer assistant Small Service 8

4 SPECIFICATIONS OF SMES' FRAMEWORK

Before proposing any framework, the required charac- teristics of the framework should be identified. Further- more, it should be guaranteed the final proposed frame- work follows the needed specifications. For this purpose a survey in priori literature and personal contacts and inter- view with the experts were used to find the SMEs' frame- work specifications. The interviews were conducted from
9th February to 15th March 2012. The findings of these inter-
views resulted the specifications of the framework for ERP implementation in SMEs that can be briefed in eleven key items that are [34]:
- Generic and not perspective
- Implementable
- Simple structure and practical for implementation
- Simplify for understanding
- Facilitate the communication
- Links clearly between elements of framework
- Present key ERP system implementation processes
- Include stakeholders interface
- Not tool-based
- Include CSFs of ERP systems implementation
- Aid to documentation
These criteria should be considered when developing a framework for SMEs. The next section discusses a pro- posed conceptual implementation framework considering these characteristics.

5 FRAMEWORK FOR ERP IMPLEMENTATION

Broadly defined, a framework is a theoretical or con- ceptual structure intended to serve as a support or guide- line for the building of something useful. Bernard [35] de- fined framework as a structure for organizing information that defines the areas of the architecture and relation of the components among the scope. The framework applies to
enterprises to classify and simplify the logical structure to organize the descriptive representation of enterprises [36].
The graphical framework is the most simplistic form depicts the data, process, relation and the intersections be- tween the roles in the design process [36].
Regarding, the implementation of ERP systems is risky and enterprise-wide project and lacking of frame- work for implementing of ERP systems in developing countries and especially in the SMEs of these countries, there is a need for a comprehensive framework as a guide- line to implement ERP systems in SMEs of developing countries. This framework can be considered as a first step for developing software modules for the various ERP ap- plications.
It's aimed that the proposed framework in this study
attends to the required specifications of SMEs' framework, with simple implementation methodology and lifecycle, and also includes the CSFs and all required elements and approaches of ERP implementation. In the case of ERP im- plementation, it should be started by trying to include the range of approaches such as developing a project plan management with detailed stages suitable as implementing methodology, enterprise architecture and including the stakeholders, standards, internal and external environ- ment, etc. (see Figure 1). The description of four stages methodology of proposed framework will be outlined as follows:
The first phase, planning for implementation: involv- ing the strategic planning to enterprise, identification, con- ceptual definition, setup the system and requirements and analysis of current status of the enterprise. It follows by business architecture to define the lines of business and business functions performed enterprises, as well as the

IJSER © 2014 http://www.ijser.org

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 5, Issue 9, September-2014 14

ISSN 2229-5518

grouping of common business processes [37]. This identi- fies the business products and services of the enterprises and the contribution of technology to support this process- es. [35]. The second phase of ERP implementation includes the design of the systems involving of preliminary and de- tailed designs. The following architectures should be es- tablished in this phase:

Solution architecture: A portfolio of integrated applica-

tion systems required to satisfy business information needs and solutions, which facilitate rapid development and de- livery in a systematic and well-disciplined manner [37].

Data & Information architecture: A set of data models

that examine the key information assets.
with the aim of providing a shared, distributed, and con-
sistent data resource. It also identifies individual responsibilities for managing information [37].

System & Application architecture: The application archi- tecture describes the software applications that are needed to de- ploy organization’s business processes governed by business rules [35, 37].

Technical architecture: This element details the organiza- tion’s technology strategies, its extended technology linkages, and their impact on business initiatives [37]. This is the back- bone of the architecture that is intended to the networks and in- frastructure that the enterprise uses to host systems, applications, databases, websites, local area networks (LANs), wide area net- works (WANs), system application networks (SANs), Intranets, Extranets, and wireless networks.

Third phase is implementation & control: including the configu- ration, migration, implementation, and stabilization stages of the system. The development of a comprehensive configuration and test of components (modules) with real data will be constituted as the first step and Migration Planning is the next step of this phase. The planning of the system migration and analyze the costs, benefits and risks of migration and fitting of system and training of end user and preparing of user manual are included in this step.
The implementation defines all those tasks that must be car-
ried out, such as: hiring and training personnel, and developing or changing the organization; testing and validation of system inte- gration and releasing into operation. The next step of the imple- mentation and control phase is stabilization. The enterprise at- tempts to clean up its processes and data and adjusting to the new environment. The next step of this phase is acceptance and regu- lar operation of the system. Organizational members accept and employ the ERP application in organizational tasks. Forth phase of ERP implementation is evaluation and improvement of the implemented system. Evaluation divided by three categories: (1) project assessment with evaluating of time and budget, (2) system assessment that evaluates system quality, service quality, user satisfaction, user satisfaction and organizational satisfaction, and (3) outcome assessment: the implemented system will be as- sessed comparing with the expectations of the users, owners and all internal and external stakeholders of the system. The last step of this phase is maintenance and continuous improvement with upgrading of the system.
In addition of the aforementioned implementation method- ology phases, the proposed framework is considering the follow- ing approaches:

Organizational Environment: includes upper manage- ment, size of the firm [30], capabilities & skills of staffs [38], change culture, business culture, IT infrastructure [30], re- sources [39], organizational structure, policy of communi- cation & collaboration and decision making style [40].

External Environment: includes kind of industry, com-

petitive moves [39], national culture, market area, economy status (local and global), legislation/government [40], cus- tomer orientation [39] and supplier orientation [39].

Critical Success Factors: successful implementation of

ERP in SMEs of developing countries is crucially related to attention to the critical success factors that classified in sev- en major factors [29]: culture and resource management, project management and evaluation, process reengineering and change management, project team and training, upper management support and commitment, and consultant and vendor services. The relation of these factors to each stages of implementation of system is discussed in next part of this study.

Project Champion / Steering Committee: champion is an

experienced member of the project whose provides the au- thority to engage the proper members in project team. This element is one of the key elements for project success.

Project Management Plan: due to the ERP implementa-

tion projects are an enterprise-wide and complex project, a proper project plan and management of its activities, re- sources and evaluating of cost and time are very significant to achieve the successful implementation.

Workforce planning: as the people are the most valuable

resource of an enterprise, their roles, responsibilities and skills should be noticed. This element is for the planning workforce and their detailed training for ERP component operations support at all levels of the enterprise [35].

Standards: the needed system's standards are included

in this category. The required standards for data acquisi- tion, transaction of data, security and etc. should be con- sidered. These standards are key of framework and process management and can be came from International (ISO/CEN/IEEE), national, local, governmental, industry and enterprise sources [35].

Security Planning: The security should be one the most

significant part of the strategic goals in any information sys- tems. It includes physical and informational securities that guarantees the accuracy, safety and authentication of the sys- tems, information into business processes and controls the information flows in all levels of the enterprise [41].

IJSER © 2014 http://www.ijser.org

.,.,...,

Planning Phase:

E2

s::

0

·

:::!:

0

'L

."0'

"''

System & Application Arch.

<!)

<!)

P..

>--<

.....

t8

..... ffi j

0..

cJ5

1!

.,.,

6

;::l

0

>

..c'

u....

"81'

OJ:)

·E

ill

c:

-

'-'l

o<l

c

·"c':

Cll

0

;o

c:

-....,,0.,..,.,

"c:' .,'.,

·0- "C"'-'1

.... Cz"'-1

Cll

.E

"Q'j

Q

::l

Qj

Q

0

I Evaluation & Improvement Phase:

Continuous

Evaluation

Project Assessment

System Assessment

Outcome Assessment

Project

Completed Project

Technology Architecture

Implementation & Control Phase:

Acceptance

.....

0

::::

<!)

f.x.,

'"0

<!)

[/]

0

0..

0

...c:

E--<

......

<!)

!3

-

f.x.,

0 <J)

N

iS -

:1:'

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 5, Issue 9, September-2014 16

ISSN 2229-5518

6 RELEVANCE CSFS AND IMPLEMENTATION PHASES

Regarding the characteristic of qualitative research that can be descriptive [42], the interview as a general qualita- tive instrument was used to specify the interrelationship between the classified CSFs [9] and the stages of proposed methodology in framework for implementation of the ERP systems in SMEs. The questionnaire was designed for structured interview. The first version of the questionnaire asked CSF of each stage separately and the respondents should be listed their desired CSFs in a list at the under of
each stage. The content validity of the questionnaire was checked using the recommendation of four academic and practitioner experts. They recommended that it will be bet- ter that the relevance can be specified as a relevance matrix. The files contained the specification of the proposed framework, methodology process stages and classified CSFs with the detailed items of each factors and explana- tion of the interview questions, were sent to the respond- ents.

Table 2. The matrix of CSFs versus implementation stages interrelationship

They have been wanted to study the files containing the detailed exploration of the framework and CSFs first. Then, they were asked this question: Which CSF(s) is/are important (or very important) and should be considered well in each implementation stage to be confident for achieving the suc- cess in implementation? The interviewees studied and con- centrated on implementation framework and methodology and specified which CSFs are important or very important
at each stages of implementation. In particular status, they explained more to clarify their responses. Having interview results and open coding for validation and getting more reliability in results, the experts' suggestions for the rele- vance of the CSFs with the stages of implementing ERP in SMEs proposed in developed framework are summed in Table 2. Regarding the literature, it seems that ten respond- ents are adequate to find the relevance of the important

IJSER © 2014 http://www.ijser.org

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 5, Issue 9, September-2014 17

ISSN 2229-5518

CSFs with the stages of ERP implementation [25, 33]. The summed occurrence number means the count of the ex- pert's opinion that believed the CSF is important (or very important) in the particular stage of ERP implementation and should be considered well to achieving the successful implementation in that stage and whole of the project con- fidently. In a scale of the results, the numbers greater than
3 that shows the loading scale more than 0.33 [43] were
considered as very significant that they are high relevance. It's not mean that the other CSFs with a summation less than 3 are not important. But also, these CSFs are less rele- vant with the stages of the implementation. Therefore, all of the CSFs should be carefully considered. The high relevant factors in each stage are gray highlighted in Table 2 to show more visible. It can be seen that the most quoted factors that are significant in the most of the stages of implementation are related to them are: "Upper-Management Support, Commit- ment and Communication" and "Culture & Resource Man- agement" factors with total 86 iterations of quoting as im- portant (or very important) factors by experts panel. The se- cond rank is being allocated to "Project Management and Evaluation" and "ERP Project Team & Training" factors with

83 iterations. The third grade is for "Consultant and Vendor

Services" factor with 62 occurrences. "Process Reengineering &

Change Management" is ranked in fourth grade with 44 itera- tions and "Technology Management & Suitability" is the next one with 38 occurrences.

7 CASE STUDY

To check applicability and validation of the framework, it was applied in a case study. Company A was established in

1985 and started to producing in 1992 in industrial region of Yazd, Iran and one of the pioneer companies in producing of refractory materials in Iran. It has about 230 employees and can be classified as medium sized enterprise with annual sell- ing in 2011 was about 2.58 million US$. The company used computerized information systems in 1992 and installed the ERP system, designed and implemented by one of the local vendors, in 2005. The system was improved to new version modules in early of 2012 among an improvement and imple- mentation project during three months. The proposed frame- work was implied as a guideline for implementation of new version of ERP system in this company. After following the framework, the summarized results of the evaluation are as followings:

The respondent in this company was the system analyst and manager of IT department. He has more than eleven years experience in this field. He believed that the proposed frame- work with including of the appendix and detailed description is complete and their company followed it regarding the re- quirements of the implementation and improvement of ERP system in the company. Totally about 70% of the stages of the framework could be implied in their firm and about 35% of

the CSFs were considered among the implementation of the system. Nevertheless, some of the articles and approached could not be followed because of the required infrastructure was not been ready. The respondent in this case company be- lieved that there is not any wrong link, wrong or extra element in the proposed framework and it was useful for their compa- ny and can be useful for similar ones. He mentioned the phase

3 (implementation and control) and phase 4 (evaluation and improvement) have most usefulness stages and noted as the strength points of this framework. The framework is simpli- fied adequately and included the all required stakeholders in implementation of the system. The suggestion to improve the usability of this framework is preparing and enhancing of or- ganizational culture in SMEs of developing countries. The re- sults of the survey in this case showed that the proposed framework covers all required specifications of SMEs' frame- work.

8 CONCLUSION

Now a days, enterprises can be alive only and only if they can fulfill their customer orders in proper time, with the best cost and quality and also can obtain the reasonable cus- tomer service for them [44]. Information technology and par- ticularly ERP systems can facilitate these aims. While there is wide adoption of ERP systems in Western economies, devel- oping countries lag far behind them [45]. However, due to recent economic growth and increased global competitive pressure, developing countries and especially the SMEs in these countries are increasingly becoming major targets of ERP vendors. As ERP systems are still in their early stages in these countries, there is an urgent need for understanding ERP implementation issues in SMEs of developing countries. The authors attempt to specify the required characteristics of SMEs' framework and then propose a comprehensive concep- tual framework with considering of the desired specifications of SMEs framework. This framework includes the approaches, elements and implementation methodology processes. The proposed conceptual framework included four phases of im- plementation as lifecycle: planning, selection and design, im- plementation and control, and evaluation and improvement. There are also the required elements in the framework that can improve the suitability and usability of the framework: project champion / steering committee, project management plan, critical success factors (CSFs), organizational environ- ment, external environment, stakeholders, standard, security and workforce. The including of simplified methodology in the framework and attending of required characteristics of SMEs' framework can facilitate the implementation of the ERP in SMEs without need to technical tools, high experienced and technical staffs. Furthermore, identification of interrelation of CSFs and implementation stages can guarantee catching the ERP project aims. The proposed framework was validated in an Iranian SME and the results showed that it is a comprehen-

IJSER © 2014 http://www.ijser.org

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 5, Issue 9, September-2014 18

ISSN 2229-5518

sive methodology that can help SMEs of developing countries to implement their own ERP systems. It needs further studies and implementing in different industries cases to improve the validation and possible revision to enhance it.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

The authors wish to thank Shiraz Branch, Islamic Azad Uni- versity, Shiraz, Iran that supports in part for this research.

REFERENCES

1. Zaied, A.N., Strategic Planning for e-Development in Developing Countries. International Arab Journal of Information Technology, 2008. 5(2): p. 109-114.

2. Beaver, G. and C. Prince, Management, strategy and policy in the UK small business sector: a critical review. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 2004. 11(1): p. 34-49.

3. Meckel, M., et al., A taxonomy of e-business adoption and strategies in small and medium sized enterprises. Strategic Change, 2004. 13(5): p. 259-269.

4. Eurostat, European business: facts and figures: data 1998-

20022004: European Communities.

5. Walsh, G., P. Schubert, and C. Jones, Enterprise system

investments for competitive advantage: An empirical study of

Swiss SMEs. European Management Review, 2010. 7: p.

180–189.

6. Bannock, G., The economics and management of small business:

an international perspective2005: Psychology Press.

7. Bannock, G. and M. Daly, Small business statistics1994: Paul

Chapman.

8. Stokes, D. and N. Wilson, Small business management and

entrepreneurship2010: Cengage Learning EMEA.

9. Aarabi, M., et al., A comparative study on critical success

factors (CSFs) of ERP systems implementation among SMEs

and large firms in developing countries. International Journal of Advancements in Computing Technology, 2012. 4(9): p.

226-239.

10. Blau, P.M., W.V. Heydebrand, and R.E. Stauffer, The

structure of small bureaucracies. American Sociological

Review, 1966: p. 179-191.

11. Blili, S. and L. Raymond, Information technology: threats and

opportunities for small and medium-sized enterprises.

International Journal of Information Management, 1993.

13(6): p. 439-448.

12. Cohn, T. and R.A. Lindberg, How management is different in small companies1972: American Management Association New York.

13. Dandridge, T.C., Children are not little grown-ups: Small

business needs its own organizational theory. Journal of Small

Business Management, 1979. 17(2): p. 53-57.

14. Lefebvre, L.A., R. Mason, and E. Lefebvre, The influence prism in SMEs: the power of CEOs' perceptions on technology policy and its organizational impacts. Management science,

1997: p. 856-878.

15. Gable, G.G., A multidimensional model of client success when engaging external consultants. Management science, 1996: p.

1175-1198.

16. Wong, K.Y. and E. Aspinwall, Characterizing knowledge management in the small business environment. Journal of Knowledge Management, 2004. 8(3): p. 44-61.

17. Thong, J.Y.L., Resource constraints and information systems implementation in Singaporean small businesses. Omega, 2001.

29(2): p. 143-156.

18. Thong, J.Y.L., C.S. Yap, and K. Raman, Top management support, external expertise and information systems implementation in small businesses. Information Systems Research, 1996. 7(2): p. 248-267.

19. Yusof, S.M., Development of a Framework for TQM Implementation in Small Business, 2000, University of Birmingham: Birmingham. p. 174.

20. Lefebvre, E. and L.A. Lefebvre, Firm innovativeness and CEO

characteristics in small manufacturing firms. Journal of

Engineering and Technology Management, 1992. 9(3-4): p.

243-277.

21. Harvey, J., L.A. Lefebvre, and E. Lefebvre, Exploring the relationship between productivity problems and technology adoption in small manufacturing firms. Engineering Management, IEEE Transactions on, 1992. 39(4): p. 352-358.

22. Lynch, A. and C. Wilson, To Identify Performance Measurement Priorities and Associated Decision-Making Scenarios in the SME. Journal of Academic Research in Economics (JARE), 2009. 2: p. 145.

23. d'Amboise, G. and M. Muldowney, Management theory for small business: attempts and requirements. Academy of management Review, 1988: p. 226-240.

24. Welsh, J.A. and J.F. White, A small business is not a little big business. Harvard business review, 1981. 59(4): p. 18-32.

25. Parr, A. and G. Shanks, A model of ERP project implementation. Journal of Information Technology, 2000.

15(4): p. 289-303.

26. Kalakota, R. and M. Robinson, E-business 2.0: Roadmap for Success2001, Boston, MA, USA: Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc.

27. Chan, J.W.K., Prioritization the Critical Success Factors for

ERP Implementation Project: Production Postponement

Perspective. Industrial Engineering Research, 2008: p. 11.

28. Umble, E.J., R.R. Haft, and M.M. Umble, Enterprise resource

planning: Implementation procedures and critical success

IJSER © 2014 http://www.ijser.org

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 5, Issue 9, September-2014 19

ISSN 2229-5518

factors. European Journal of Operational Research, 2003.

146(2): p. 241-257.

29. Aarabi, M., et al., Critical Success Factors of Enterprise Resource Planning Implementation in Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises in Developing Countries: a Review and Research Direction, in International Industrial Engineering and Service Science (IESS 2011) Conference2011: Solo, Indonesia.

30. Somers, T.M., K. Nelson, and A. Ragowsky, Enterprise resource planning (ERP) for the next millennium: development of an integrative framework and implications for research, in Proceedings of the Americans Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS)2000.

31. Markus, M.L. and C. Tanis, The enterprise systems experience- from adoption to success. Framing the domains of IT research: Glimpsing the future through the past, 2000. 173: p. 207-173.

32. Ehie, I.C. and M. Madsen, Identifying critical issues in

enterprise resource planning (ERP) implementation.

Computers in Industry, 2005. 56(6): p. 545-557.

33. Parr, A. and G. Shanks. A taxonomy of ERP implementation approaches. in Tthe 33rd Annual Hawaii International Conference onSystem Sciences. 2000. Hawaii: IEEE.

34. Aarabi, M., M.Z. Mat Saman, and K.Y. Wong, A conceptual framework for ERP systems implementation in SMEs, in 5th International Colloquium on Business & Management2012: Bangkok, Thailand.

35. Bernard, S.A., An introduction to enterprise architecture. Vol.

2. 2005, Bloomington, IN, USA: AuthorHouse.

36. Zachman, J.A., The framework for enterprise architecture:

background, description and utility. Zachman International,

1996.

37. Saha, P., Handbook mof Enterprise Systems Architecture in

Practice2007: Information Science Reference.

38. Sledgianowski, D., M.H.A. Tafti, and J. Kierstead, SME

ERP system sourcing strategies: a case study. Industrial

Management & Data Systems, 2008. 108(4): p. 421-436.

39. Vos, J.P., Developing strategic self-descriptions of SMEs.

Technovation, 2005. 25(9): p. 989-999.

40. Otieno, J.O., Enterprise Resource Planning Systems Implementation and Upgrade, 2010, School of Engineering and Information Sciences Middlesex University A thesis submitted to the School of Engineering and Information Sciences, Middlesex University. p. 288.

41. Scheer, A.W., ARIS - Business Process Modeling2000:

Springer Verlag.

42. Bogdan, R.C. and S.K. Biklen, Qualitative research for

education : an introduction to theory and methods. Forth

ed2003: Allyn and Bacon Boston.

43. Ho, R., Handbook of univariate and multivariate data analysis

and interpretation with SPSS2006: CRC Press.

44. Irfan, D., X. Xiaofei, and D.S. Chun, Developing Approaches

of Supply Chain Management Systems of Enterprises in

Pakistan. International Arab Journal of Information

Technology, 2008. 5(3): p. 296-303.

45. Al-Mabrouk, K. and J. Soar, A Delphi study on issues for successful information technology transfer in the Arab world. International Arab Journal of Information Technology,

2009. 6(1).

IJSER © 2014 http://www.ijser.org