Abstract:
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to explore enterprise resource planning (ERP)
implementation project performance of successful and unsuccessful implementations; critical
elements (CEs) that are conducive to success; and whether implementation project performance and
CEs vary across the number of modules implemented, product type, and number of employees affected
by the ERP.
Design/methodology/approach – Survey research methodology was used and data collected from
74 ERP implementation projects in Sri Lanka. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics,
independent sample t-test, one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), and logistic regression.
Findings – ERP implementation project performance significantly differs between successful and
unsuccessful implementations. The importance given to CEs of training and education, user
involvement, managing user expectations, interdepartmental cooperation, ERP teamwork and team
composition, software development, testing and troubleshooting, project management, project
champion, BPR and customisation, change management programme and culture, and effective
communication significantly differ between successful and unsuccessful implementations. Although
ERP implementation project performance does not vary by the number of ERP modules implemented,
product type, and number of employees affected by the ERP, several CEs were found to vary by these
three contextual variables.
Originality/value – Despite extensive literature on ERP implementations, empirical studies are
needed for a better understanding of CEs that are conducive to success. In the context of globalisation
of business operations and interlocking supply chains, research on CEs that are conducive to success
in Sri Lanka is interesting, relevant and timely, since there is an increasing interest in understanding
the work environment in Asia.
Citation:
Wickramasinghe, V., & Gunawardena, V. (2010). Critical elements that discriminate between successful and unsuccessful ERP implementations in Sri Lanka. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 3(3), 466–485. https://doi.org/10.1108/17410391011061771