Leuven, A v and Voordijk, H (2001) Enterprise resource planning in construction: An evaluation of recent implementations. In: Akintoye, A (ed.) Proceedings of 17th Annual ARCOM Conference, 5-7 September 2001, Salford, UK.
Abstract
In a large number of construction firms, Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) systems have replaced non-integrated information systems by integrated and maintainable software. The implementation of ERP systems in the construction industry is a difficult task. So far, ERP implementations have yielded more failures than successes in this industry. Our study tries to understand the underlying factors that cause success or failure of ERP in construction by analysing how ERP fits into the IT and business strategy of a firm. Empirical research was conducted by a multiple case study of three ERP-implementations in different business environments. Based on the results of this study, propositions are developed that relate factors for the success of ERP in construction to concepts of the existing literature on IT and strategy. These propositions are indicative, but present nevertheless a clear overall trend.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | business strategy; enterprise resource planning; information technology; success factors |
| Index terms: | enterprise resource planning, case study, strategy, business strategy, success factor, construction firm, implementation, information system, construction industry, information technology |
| Subjects: | information systems, computer science, industry analysis, management, health monitoring assessment and metrics, contractual arrangements, computing systems, business, organization, data collection methods |
| Topics: | Digital Applications, Research Practice, Information Management, Business Strategy, Health and Safety, Procurement |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTE |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here