Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 5

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Deep Learning for Enterprise Systems Implementation Lifecycle Challenges: Research Directions

Hassanien, Hossam El-Din, Elragal, Ahmed·2021·Informatics
DOI 10.3390/informatics8010011
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Transforming the state-of-the-art definition and anatomy of enterprise systems (ESs) seems to some academics and practitioners as an unavoidable destiny. Value depletion lead by early retirement and/or replacement of ESs solutions has been a constant throughout the past decade. That did drive an enormous amount of research that works on addressing the problems leading to the resource drain. The resource waste had persisted throughout the ESs implementation lifecycle phases and dimensions especially post-live phases; leading to depleting the value of the social and technical dimensions of the lifecycle. Parallel to this research stream, the momentum gained by deep learning (DL) algorithms and platforms has been exponentially growing to fuel the advancements toward artificial intelligence and automated augmentation. Correspondingly, this paper is set out to present five key research directions through which DL would take part as a contributor towards the transformation of the ESs state-of-the-art. The paper reviews the ESs implementation lifecycle challenges and the intersection with DL research conducted on ESs by analyzing and synthesizing key basket journals (list of the Association of Information Systems). The paper also presents results from several experiments showcasing the effectiveness of DL in adding a level of augmentation to ESs by analyzing a large set of data extracted from the Atlassian Jira Software Issue Tracking System across different ecosystems. The paper then concludes by presenting the research directions and discussing socio-technical research courses that work on key frontiers identified within this scholarly work.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/informatics8010011

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Figure 1 Deep belief networks (DBNs) architecture [14].
Figure 1 Deep belief networks (DBNs) architecture [14].CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 2 Deep belief networks architecture [14].
Figure 2 Deep belief networks architecture [14].CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 3 Graphical representation of the highest adoption change (sorted by adoption change %) of deep learning platform as conducted by KDnuggets poll 2018-2019 [39].
Figure 3 Graphical representation of the highest adoption change (sorted by adoption change %) of deep learning platform as conducted by KDnuggets poll 2018-2019 [39].CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 4 Graphical representation of the lowest adoption change (sorted by adoption change %) of deep learning platform as conducted by KDnuggets poll 2018-2019 [39].
Figure 4 Graphical representation of the lowest adoption change (sorted by adoption change %) of deep learning platform as conducted by KDnuggets poll 2018-2019 [39].CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 5 The ESs implementation lifecycle [5].
Figure 5 The ESs implementation lifecycle [5].CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 7 Infrastructure setup.
Figure 7 Infrastructure setup.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 8 Model results from the deep learning model (Siamese LSTM) used as part of the conducted experiment across the four JIRA issue tracking repositories. Please see Appendix B for the detailed graphs produced by the model upon training for 50 epochs. Full model accuracy and loss versus the four handled issue tracking system (ITS) repositories are also illustrated on Figure A1 of Appendix B.
Figure 8 Model results from the deep learning model (Siamese LSTM) used as part of the conducted experiment across the four JIRA issue tracking repositories. Please see Appendix B for the detailed graphs produced by the model upon training for 50 epochs. Full model accuracy and loss versus the four handled issue tracking system (ITS) repositories are also illustrated on Figure A1 of Appendix B.CC-BY · From the PDF
Image 8
CC-BY · From the PDF
Image 9
CC-BY · From the PDF
Image 10
CC-BY · From the PDF
Image 11
CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure A2. Python-based Keras libraries and prerequisites used for the experiment.
Figure A2. Python-based Keras libraries and prerequisites used for the experiment.CC-BY · From the PDF

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 114

  1. Deng, 2014, Deep Learning: Methods and Applications, Found. Trends Signal Process., 7, 197, 10.1561/2000000039 · DOI · Paper page
  2. Najafabadi, 2015, Deep Learning applications and challenges in big data analytics, J. Big Data, 2, 1, 10.1186/s40537-014-0007-7 · DOI · Paper page
  3. Boza, 2015, The interoperability force in the ERP field, Enterp. Inf. Syst., 9, 257, 10.1080/17517575.2013.866697 · DOI
  4. Markus, 2000, The Enterprise System Experience—From Adoption to Success, Fram. Domains IT Res. Manag. Proj. Futur. Through Past, 173, 173
  5. Esteves, J.M.J., and Pastor, J.A. (1999, January 25–26). An ERP Life-cycle-based Research Agenda. Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop in Enterprise Management & Resource Planning, Venice, Italy.
  6. Markus, 2000, Learning from adopters’ experiences with ERP: Problems encountered and success achieved, J. Inf. Technol., 15, 245
  7. Alter, 2013, Theory of Workarounds, Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst., 34, 1
  8. Volkoff, 2007, Technological Embeddedness and Organizational Change, Organ. Sci., 18, 832, 10.1287/orsc.1070.0288 · DOI
  9. Lindley, 2008, The hidden financial costs of ERP software, Manag. Financ., 34, 78
  10. Law, 2010, Managing the full ERP Life-Cycle: Considerations of maintenance and support requirements and IT governance practice as integral elements of the formula for successful ERP adoption, Comput. Ind., 61, 297, 10.1016/j.compind.2009.10.004 · DOI
  11. Sarkis, 2003, Managing large-scale global enterprise resource planning systems: A case study at Texas Instruments, Int. J. Inf. Manag., 23, 431, 10.1016/S0268-4012(03)00070-7 · DOI
  12. Hustad, 2011, A study of the ERP Project Life Cycles in Small-and-Medium-Sized Enterprises: Critical Issues and Lessons Learned, World Acad. Sci. Eng. Technol., 5, 85
  13. 2016, Solving misfits in ERP implementations by SMEs, Inf. Syst. J., 26, 369, 10.1111/isj.12090 · DOI
  14. Schmidhuber, J. (2015). Deep Learning. Scholarpedia, 10. · DOI
  15. Tang, 2015, Deep learning for sentiment analysis: Successful approaches and future challenges, Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Data Min. Knowl. Discov., 5, 292, 10.1002/widm.1171 · DOI
  16. Bengio, Y. (2009). Learning Deep Architectures for AI, Now Publishers Inc. · DOI
  17. Craswell, N., Mitra, B., Yilmaz, E., Campos, D., and Voorhees, E.M. (arXiv, 2020). Overview of the TREC 2019 deep learning track, arXiv. · DOI
  18. Collobert, R., and Weston, J. (2008, January 5–9). A Unified Architecture for Natural Language Processing: Deep Neural Networks with Multitask Learning. Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Machine Learning, Helsinki, Finland. · DOI · Paper page
  19. Glorot, X., and Bengio, Y. (2010, January 13–15). Understanding the difficulty of training deep feedforward neural networks. Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, Sardinia, Italy.
  20. Baldi, P. (2012, January 2). Autoencoders, Unsupervised Learning, and Deep Architectures. Proceedings of the ICML Workshop on Unsupervised and Transfer Learning. JMLR Workshop and Conference Proceedings, Bellevue, WA, USA.
  21. Erhan, D., Bengio, Y., Courville, A., Manzagol, P.-A., and Vincent, P. (2010, January 13–15). Why Does Unsupervised Pre-Training Help Deep Learning?. Proceedings of the Thirteenth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics. JMLR Workshop and Conference Proceedings, Saradinia, Italy.
  22. Hinton, 2006, A Fast Learning Algorithm for Deep Belief Nets, Neural Comput., 18, 1527, 10.1162/neco.2006.18.7.1527 · DOI · Paper page
  23. Hinton, 2006, Reducing the dimensionality of data with neural networks, Science, 313, 504, 10.1126/science.1127647 · DOI · Paper page
  24. Bengio, 2007, Scaling Learning Algorithms towards AI, Large Scale Kernel Mach., 34, 1
  25. Hinton, G. (2012). A Practical Guide to Training Restricted Boltzmann Machines. Neural Networks: Tricks of the Trade, Springer. · DOI · Paper page
  26. Sarikaya, 2014, Application of deep belief networks for natural language understanding, IEEE Trans. Audio Speech Lang. Process., 22, 778, 10.1109/TASLP.2014.2303296 · DOI
  27. Jiang, 2018, Text classification based on deep belief network and softmax regression, Neural Comput. Appl., 29, 61, 10.1007/s00521-016-2401-x · DOI · Paper page
  28. Zhang, X., and LeCun, Y. (2015). Text Understanding from Scratch. arXiv.
  29. Zeiler, M.D., and Fergus, R. (2014, January 6–12). Visualizing and understanding convolutional networks. Proceedings of the European Conference on Computer Vision, Zurich, Switzerland. · DOI · Paper page
  30. Le, H.T., Cerisara, C., and Denis, A. (2018). Do Convolutional Networks need to be Deep for Text Classification?. arXiv.
  31. Schmidhuber, J., Graves, A., Gomez, F., and Hochreiter, S. (2015). The Recurrent Neural Networks, Cambridge University Press. Available online: https://people.idsia.ch/~juergen/rnnbook.html.
  32. Guo, 2020, A Deep Look into neural ranking models for information retrieval, Inf. Process. Manag., 57, 102067, 10.1016/j.ipm.2019.102067 · DOI
  33. Li, H., and Lu, Z. (2016, January 17–21). Deep learning for information retrieval. Proceedings of the 39th Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, Pisa, Italy. · DOI
  34. Goldberg, Y. (2020, December 11). Neural Network Methods in Natural Language Processing; Synthesis Lectures on Human Language Technologies 10.1. Available online: https://doi.org/10.2200/S00762ED1V01Y201703HLT037. · DOI · Paper page
  35. Mikolov, T., Chen, K., Corrado, G., and Dean, J. Efficient estimation of word representations in vector space. arXiv, 2013.
  36. Allen, C., and Hospedales, T. (2019, January 10–15). Analogies explained: Towards understanding word embeddings. Proceedings of the International Conference on Machine Learning, Long Beach, CA, USA.
  37. Mueller, J., and Thyagarajan, A. (2016, January 12–17). Siamese recurrent architectures for learning sentence similarity. Proceedings of the 30th AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Phoenix, AZ, USA. · DOI · Paper page
  38. Zhang, 2018, A survey on deep learning for big data, Inf. Fusion, 42, 146, 10.1016/j.inffus.2017.10.006 · DOI · Paper page
  39. Jauro, 2020, Deep learning architectures in emerging cloud computing architectures: Recent development, challenges and next research trend, Appl. Soft Comput. J., 96, 106582, 10.1016/j.asoc.2020.106582 · DOI
  40. Li, 2020, The Deep Learning Compiler: A Comprehensive Survey, IEEE Trans. Parallel Distrib. Syst., 32, 708, 10.1109/TPDS.2020.3030548 · DOI
  41. Fan, Y., Pang, L., Hou, J., Guo, J., Lan, Y., and Cheng, X. (2017). MatchZoo: A Toolkit for Deep Text Matching. arXiv.
  42. Haddara, M., and Elragal, A. (2011, January 5–7). ERP lifecycle: When to retire your ERP system?. Proceedings of the International Conference on ENTERprise Information Systems, Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany. · DOI
  43. Elragal, A., and Hassanien, H.E. (2019). Augmenting Advanced Analytics into Enterprise Systems: A Focus on Post-Implementation Activities. Systems, 7. · DOI
  44. Chung, 2000, ERP adoption: A technological evolution approach, Int. J. Agil. Manag. Syst., 2, 24, 10.1108/14654650010312570 · DOI
  45. Bhatti, 2014, Acquisition (Purchasing) of ERP systems from organizational buying behavior perspective, Int. J. Bus. Soc. Res., 4, 33
  46. Brown, W. (2004, January 10–13). Enterprise resource planning (ERP) implementation planning and structure: A recipe for ERP success. Proceedings of the 32nd Annual ACM SIGUCCS Conference on User Services, Baltimore, MD, USA. · DOI
  47. Haines, M.N., and Goodhue, D.L. (2000, January 21–24). ERP Implementations: The Role of Implementation Partners and Knowledge Transfer. Proceedings of the Institute of Rural Management Conference, Anchorage, AL, USA.
  48. Nah, 2001, Critical factors for successful implementation of enterprise systems, Bus. Process Manag. J., 7, 285, 10.1108/14637150110392782 · DOI
  49. Hecht, S., Wittges, H., and Krcmar, H. (2011, January 9–11). IT capabilities in ERP maintenance—A review of the ERP post-implementation literature. Proceedings of the European Conference on Information Systems, Helsinki, Finland.
  50. Light, 2001, The maintenance implifications of the customization of ERP software, J. Softw. Maint. Evol., 13, 415, 10.1002/smr.240 · DOI
  51. Donovan, 2001, Successful ERP Implementation the First Time, Perform. Improv., 25, 1
  52. Umble, 2000, Avoiding ERP implementation failure, Ind. Manag., 44, 25
  53. Rasmy, M., Tharwat, A., and Ashraf, S. (November, January 31). Enterprise resource planning (ERP) implementation in the Egyptian organizational context. Proceedings of the European and Mediterranean Conference on Information Systems, Cairo, Egypt.
  54. Muscatello, 2006, Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP): A Postimplementation Cross-Case Analysis, Inf. Resour. Manag. J., 19, 61, 10.4018/irmj.2006070105 · DOI
  55. Wang, 2007, Improving enterprise resource planning (ERP) fit to organizational process through knowledge transfer, Int. J. Inf. Manag., 27, 200, 10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2007.02.002 · DOI
  56. Osnes, 2018, ERP Systems in Multinational Enterprises: A literature Review of Post-implementation Challenges, Procedia Comput. Sci., 138, 541, 10.1016/j.procs.2018.10.074 · DOI
  57. Somers, T.M., and Nelson, K. (2001, January 3–6). The impact of critical success factors across the stages of enterprise resource planning implementations. Proceedings of the 34th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Maui, HI, USA.
  58. Sun, 2005, Achievement assessment for enterprise resource planning (ERP) system implementations based on critical success factors (CSFs), Int. J. Prod. Econ., 98, 189, 10.1016/j.ijpe.2004.05.013 · DOI
  59. Huang, 2004, Assessing risk in ERP projects: Identify and prioritize the factors, Ind. Manag. Data Syst., 104, 681, 10.1108/02635570410561672 · DOI
  60. Von Brocke, J., Simons, A., Niehaves, B., Riemer, K., Plattfaut, R., and Cleven, A. (2009, January 8–10). Reconstructing the Giant: On the Importance of Rigour in Documenting the Literature Search Process. Proceedings of the 17th European Conference on Information Systems, Verona, Italy.
  61. Cooper, 1988, Organizing knowledge syntheses: A taxonomy of literature reviews, Knowl. Soc., 1, 104
  62. Randolph, 2009, A Guide to Writing the Dissertation Literature Review, Pract. Assess. Res. Eval., 14, 1
  63. Fryling, 2015, Investigating the Effect of Customization on Rework in a Higher Education Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Post-Implementation Environment: A System Dynamics Approach, J. Inf. Technol. Case Appl. Res., 17, 8
  64. Windeler, 2017, Technical systems development risk factors: The role of empowering leadership in lowering developers’ stress, Inf. Syst. Res., 28, 775, 10.1287/isre.2017.0716 · DOI
  65. Zhang, 2020, Cloud Services vs. On-Premises Software: Competition Under Security Risk and Product Customization, Inf. Syst. Res., 31, 848, 10.1287/isre.2019.0919 · DOI
  66. Chadhar, 2018, Organizational Learning and ERP Post-implementation Phase: A Situated Learning Perspective, J. Inf. Technol., 19, 138
  67. Ravichandran, 2018, Exploring the relationships between IT competence, innovation capacity and organizational agility, J. Strateg. Inf. Syst., 27, 22, 10.1016/j.jsis.2017.07.002 · DOI
  68. Tian, 2015, How Do Enterprise Resource Planning Systems Affect Firm Risk? Post-Implementation Impact, MIS Q., 39, 39, 10.25300/MISQ/2015/39.1.03 · DOI
  69. Laumer, 2017, Information quality, user satisfaction, and the manifestation of workarounds: A qualitative and quantitative study of enterprise content management system users, Eur. J. Inf. Syst., 26, 333, 10.1057/s41303-016-0029-7 · DOI
  70. Cram, 2016, Information systems control: A review and framework for emerging information systems processes, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst., 17, 216
  71. Bala, 2018, Employee dispositions to job and organization as antecedents and consequences of information systems use, Inf. Syst. J., 28, 650, 10.1111/isj.12152 · DOI
  72. Lederman, 2015, Tick a box, any box: A case study on the unintended consequences of system misuse in a hospital emergency department, J. Inf. Technol. Teach. Cases, 5, 74, 10.1057/jittc.2015.13 · DOI
  73. Deng, 2015, More than providing “solutions”: Towards an understanding of customer-oriented citizenship behaviours of IS professionals, Inf. Syst. J., 25, 489, 10.1111/isj.12051 · DOI
  74. Laumer, 2016, Work routines as an object of resistance during information systems implementations: Theoretical foundation and empirical evidence, Eur. J. Inf. Syst., 25, 317, 10.1057/ejis.2016.1 · DOI
  75. Malaurent, 2020, Learning from Workaround Practices: The Challenge of Enterprise System Implementations in Multinational Corporations, Inf. Syst. J., 30, 639, 10.1111/isj.12272 · DOI
  76. Recker, 2016, Reasoning about Discontinuance of Information System Use, J. Inf. Technol. Theory Appl., 17, 41
  77. Lin, 2018, User Resistance to the Implementation of Information Systems: A Psychological Contract Breach Perspective, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst., 19, 306
  78. Bygstad, 2020, Architectural alignment of process innovation and digital infrastructure in a high-tech hospital, Eur. J. Inf. Syst., 29, 220, 10.1080/0960085X.2020.1728201 · DOI
  79. Tong, 2015, The Road to Early Success: Impact of System Use in the Swift Response Phase, Inf. Syst. Res., 26, 418, 10.1287/isre.2015.0578 · DOI
  80. Morana, 2018, Designing Process Guidance Systems, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst., 20, 1
  81. Sykes, 2015, Support Structures and Their Impacts on Employee Outcomes: A Longitudinal Filed Study of an Enterprise System Implementation, MIS Q., 39, 473, 10.25300/MISQ/2015/39.2.09 · DOI
  82. Liu, 2018, Leveraging Social Capital to Obtain Top Management Support in Complex, Cross-Functional IT Projects, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst., 16, 707
  83. Gregor, 2020, The Anatomy of a Design Principle, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst., 21, 1622
  84. Gopal, 2020, Is the grass greener? On the strategic implications of moving along the value chain for IT service providers, Inf. Syst. Res., 31, 148, 10.1287/isre.2019.0879 · DOI
  85. Ortu, M., Destefanis, G., Adams, B., Murgia, A., Marchesi, M., and Tonelli, R. (2015, January 21). The JIRA repository dataset: Understanding social aspects of software development. Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Predictive Models and Data Analytics in Software Engineering, Beijing, China. · DOI
  86. Prakash, 2020, Characteristic of enterprise collaboration system and its implementation issues in business management, Int. J. Bus. Intell. Data Min., 16, 49
  87. Zeyer, A., Bahar, P., Irie, K., Schluter, R., and Ney, H. (2019, January 14–18). A Comparison of Transformer and LSTM Encoder Decoder Models for ASR. Proceedings of the IEEE Automatic Speech Recognition and Understanding Workshop, Sentosa, Singapore. · DOI
  88. Vaswani, A., Shazeer, N., Parmar, N., Uszkoreit, J., Jones, L., Gomez, A.N., Kaiser, Ł., and Polosukhin, I. (2017). Attention is all you need. arXiv.
  89. Kulkarni, 2018, Business Intelligence Capability: The Effect of Top Management and the Mediating Roles of User Participation and Analytical Decision Making Orientation, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst., 18, 516
  90. Recker, 2019, Information systems as representations: A review of the theory and evidence, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst., 20, 735
  91. Widjaja, 2020, Monitoring the complexity of its architectures: Design principles and an its artifact, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst., 21, 664
  92. Ma, 2019, Cross-level moderation of team cohesion in individuals’ utilitarian and hedonic information processing: Evidence in the context of team-based gamified training, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst., 20, 161
  93. Carter, 2020, IT Identity: A Measure and Empirical Investigation of its Utility to IS Research, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst., 21, 2
  94. Shollo, 2016, Towards an understanding of the role of business intelligence systems in organisational knowing, Inf. Syst. J., 26, 339, 10.1111/isj.12071 · DOI
  95. Seddon, 2017, How does business analytics contribute to business value?, Inf. Syst. J., 27, 237, 10.1111/isj.12101 · DOI
  96. Greenwood, 2019, How does the implementation of enterprise information systems affect a professional’s mobility? An empirical study, Inf. Syst. Res., 30, 563, 10.1287/isre.2018.0817 · DOI
  97. Mettler, 2016, Are business users social? A design experiment exploring information sharing in enterprise social systems, J. Inf. Technol., 31, 101, 10.1057/jit.2015.28 · DOI · Paper page
  98. Grainger, 2015, The long and winding road of enterprise system implementation: Finding success or failure?, J. Inf. Technol. Teach. Cases, 5, 92, 10.1057/jittc.2015.11 · DOI
  99. Schneider, 2018, How do requirements evolve over time? A case study investigating the role of context and experiences in the evolution of enterprise software requirements, J. Inf. Technol., 33, 151, 10.1057/s41265-016-0001-y · DOI
  100. Fay, 2018, The Effect of Big Data and Analytics on Firm Performance: An Econometric Analysis Considering Industry Characteristics, J. Manag. Inf. Syst., 35, 488, 10.1080/07421222.2018.1451955 · DOI
  101. Lai, 2016, Technology Evaluation and Imitation: Do They Have Differential or Dichotomous Effects on ERP Adoption and Assimilation in China?, J. Manag. Inf. Syst., 33, 1209, 10.1080/07421222.2016.1267534 · DOI
  102. Cui, 2020, Managing Knowledge Distance: IT-Enabled Inter-Firm Knowledge Capabilities in Collaborative Innovation, J. Manag. Inf. Syst., 37, 217, 10.1080/07421222.2019.1705504 · DOI
  103. Rossi, 2020, Balancing fluid and cemented routines in a digital workplace, J. Strateg. Inf. Syst., 29, 101616, 10.1016/j.jsis.2020.101616 · DOI
  104. Baptista, 2020, Digital work and organisational transformation: Emergent Digital/Human work configurations in modern organisations, J. Strateg. Inf. Syst., 29, 101618, 10.1016/j.jsis.2020.101618 · DOI
  105. Koo, 2019, Congruent patterns of outsourcing capabilities: A bilateral perspective, J. Strateg. Inf. Syst., 28, 101580, 10.1016/j.jsis.2019.101580 · DOI
  106. Baesens, 2016, Transformational Issues of Big Data and Analytics in Networked Business, MIS Q., 40, 807, 10.25300/MISQ/2016/40:4.03 · DOI
  107. Gust, 2017, How a Traditional Company Seeded New Analytics Capabilities, MIS Q. Exec., 16, 10
  108. Mocker, 2020, How to avoid enterprise systems landscape complexity, MIS Q. Exec., 19, 57, 10.17705/2msqe.00025 · DOI
  109. Lauterbach, 2020, Achieving Effective Use When Digitalizing Work: The Role of Representational Complexity, Rev. Lit. Arts Am., 44, 1023
  110. Venkatesh, 2019, Governance and ICT4D initiative success: A longitudinal field study of ten villages in rural India, MIS Q. Manag. Inf. Syst., 43, 1081
  111. Setia, 2020, The Takeoff of Open Source Software: A Signaling Perspective Based on Community Activities, MIS Q. Manag. Inf. Syst., 44, 1439, 10.25300/MISQ/2020/12576 · DOI
  112. Shao, 2016, Effectiveness of top management support in enterprise systems success: A contingency perspective of fit between leadership style and system life-cycle, Eur. J. Inf. Syst., 25, 131, 10.1057/ejis.2015.6 · DOI
  113. Hedman, 2015, Information system integration in mergers and acquisitions: Research ahead, Eur. J. Inf. Syst., 24, 117, 10.1057/ejis.2015.2 · DOI
  114. Bala, H., Hossain, M.M., Bhagwatwar, A., and Feng, X. (2020). Ownership and governance, scope, and empowerment: How does context affect enterprise systems implementation in organisations in the Arab World?. Eur. J. Inf. Syst., 1–27. · DOI

Cited by

See all 5

Metadata

Authors
Hassanien, H. E.-D., & Elragal, A.
Affiliations
Department of Computer Science, Electrical and Space Engineering/Faculty of Information Systems, Luleå University of Technology, SE-971 87 Luleå, Sweden
ORCID
Venue
Informatics
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2021-02-20
Volume
8
Issue
1
Pages
11
ISSN
2227-9709
DOI
10.3390/informatics8010011
Cited by
5
References
2
Language
en
Licence
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (vor)

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

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.