CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 221ERP Systems Implementation and ImpactCorporate Governance and ManagementInformation Technology Governance and Strategy

ERP system implementation in large enterprises—A systematic literature review

Ali, Mahmood, Miller, Lloyd·2017·Journal of Enterprise Information Management
DOI 10.1108/jeim-07-2014-0071
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Purpose: Enterprise resource planning (ERP) implementation brings with it a set of challenges. In order to gain a better understanding of these and they can be mitigated during the implementation process, the purpose of this paper is to use Esteves and Bohórquez (2007) classification based on ERP lifecycle framework, and content analysis to review the literature on ERP implementation in a structured format with a focus on larger enterprises, and provide a platform for practitioners to plan implementation with minimum possibility of failure. Design/methodology/approach: Esteves and Bohórquez (2007) classification based on the ERP lifecycle framework is used to develop and present a comprehensive structured review of the literature on ERP system implementation in large enterprises (LEs), with a particular focus on pre-implementation, implementation, and post-implementation. Findings: Drawing from the literature, organisations can plan implementation based on the findings and strategies presented in the study. This can lead to a better understanding of implementation with minimal probability of failure. The authors find that top management support, good project management teams, and good communications are the top three most important critical successful factors during implementation. The authors also identify critical gaps in current research. Existing research focusses predominantly on the implementation phase, but research on pre- and post-implementation is lacking, and that no industry standard implementation methodology has been developed. Research implications: This review primarily focusses on the literature in the area of ERP implementation. ERP implementation planning involves access to effective implementation strategies. Despite the literature identifying a myriad of different ERP implementation models, no standard industry ERP implementation model has been developed. The findings for ERP implementation are repetitive, inconsistent, and lack empirical research, rendering these two of the most critical areas for future research, and collaboration between ERP practitioners, system developers, and researchers. Researchers, in turn, need to become more innovative in terms of their research techniques when examining ERP implementation. Practical implications: This paper provides guidance to researchers and practitioners with an insight into published research work and their findings. It provides a better understanding of ERP implementation, which can be applied towards overcoming operational difficulties during the implementation process. Originality/value: This study is innovated in its use of Esteves and Bohórquez (2007) classification based on the ERP lifecycle framework, and content analysis to present a comprehensive structured literature review of the ERP implementation literature with a specific focus on pre-implementation, implementation, and post-implementation in LEs between the period 1989 and 2014. The technique and time period used in this study differs from those of other studies on ERP implementation. The paper brings together theoretical and practical developments on ERP implementation under a single source, which should aid practitioners, researchers and ERP developers with future research and decision making.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1108/jeim-07-2014-0071

Cites

137 of 137 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Ali, M., & Miller, L.
Affiliations
University of Business and Technology (SA)
Venue
Journal of Enterprise Information Management
Publisher
Emerald
Published
2017-07-10
Volume
30
Issue
4
Pages
666-692
ISSN
1741-0398 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1108/jeim-07-2014-0071
OpenAlex
W2616062454
Semantic Scholar
0f75ccc0d233e625a3bcbd9e047230cfb07fd075
Cited by
221
References
137
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 23 · 2023: 34 · 2022: 43 · 2021: 41 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 26 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 2
FWCI
5.05
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.emerald.com/insight/site-policies (tdm)
Locations
Journal of Enterprise Information Management (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management Information Systems › ERP Systems Implementation and Impact
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Corporate Governance and Management
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management Information Systems › Information Technology Governance and Strategy
Keywords
enterprise resource planning, ERP implementation, large corporations, pre-implementation, implementation, post-implementation, top management support, project teams, implementation strategies, implementation failure

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review