Using the AHP Method to Select an ERP System for an SME Manufacturing Company

Open access

Abstract

This paper proposes the application of the Analytic Hierarchy Process method to support decision making regarding the selection of an Enterprise Resource Planning system in a manufacturing company. The main assumption of the work is that the management of the selection of an ERP system should consider that the most important selection criteria are concerned with the functionality of the ERP system. Besides this, the aspects of total cost of ownership, technical support and implementation time or vendor experience are taken into consideration to guarantee a successful ERP implementation. The proposed procedure of an ERP system selection is dedicated for small and medium manufacturing enterprises. A structure of attributes for the AHP method is proposed on the basis of an analysis and identification of critical success factors. Different kinds of production (make-to-stock, make-to-order and engineer-to-order are taken into consideration). Illustrative examples are also given.

[1] Davenport T., Putting the Enterprise into the Enterprise System, Harvard Business Review, 76 (4), 121-133, 1998.

[2] Heizer J., Render B., Operations management - International edition (7th ed)., Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education Inc., 2003.

[3] Xue Y., Liang H., Boulton W.R., Snyder CH.A., ERP implementation failures in China: Case studies with implications for ERP vendors, International Journal of Production Economics, 97, 279-295, 2005.

[4] Saaty T.L., The Analytic Hierarchy Process, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1980.

[5] Teltumbde A., A framework of evaluating ERP projects, International Journal of Production Research, 28, 17, 4507-4520, 2000.

[6] Wei Ch.-Ch., Chien Ch.-Fu, Wang M.-J.J., An AHP-based approach to ERP system selection, Int. J. Production Economics, 96, 47-62, 2005.

[7] Karaarslan N., Gundogar E., An application for modular capability-based ERP software selection using AHP method, Intarnational Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 42, 1025-1033, 2009.

[8] Wei Ch. Ch., Wang M.-J.J., A comprehensive framework for selecting an ERP system, International Journal of Project Management, 22, 161-169, 2004.

[9] Karsak E.E., Ozogul C.O., An integrated decision making approach for ERP system selection, Expert Systems with Applications, 36, 660-667, 2009. [10] Motwani J., Mirchandani D., Madan M., Gunasekaran A., Successful implementation of ERP projects: evidence from two case studies, International Journal of Production Economics, 75, 83-96, 2002.

[11] Hong K.K., Kim Y.G., The critical success factors for ERP Implementation: an organizational fit perspective, Information & Management, 40, 25-40, 2002,

[12] Ehie I., Madsen M., Identifying critical issues in enterprise resource planning (ERP) implementation, Computers in Industry, 56, 545-557, 2005.

[13] Motwani J., Subramanian R., Gopalakrishna P., Critical factors for successful ERP implementation: Exploratory findings from four case studies, Computers in Industry, 56, 529-544, 2005.

[14] Ahmad M.M., Cuenca R.P., Critical success factors for ERP implementation in SMEs, Robotics and Computer Integrated Manufacturing, 29, 104-111, 2013.

[15] Ptak C.A., ERP tools, techniques, and applications for integrating the supply chain, St. Lucie Press, 2000.

[16] Fisher D.M., Kiang M.Y., Fisher S.A., Chi R.T., Evaluating mid-level ERP software, Journal of Computer Information Systems, 38-45, 2004.

[17] Lee J.W., Kim S.H., An integrated approach for interdependent information system project selection, International Journal of Project Management, 19, 111-8, 2001.

[18] Morton N.A., Hu Q., Implications of the fit between organizational structure and ERP: A structural contingency theory perspective, International Journal of Information Management, 28, 391-402, 2008.

Management and Production Engineering Review

The Journal of Production Engineering Committee of Polish Academy of Sciences and Polish Association for Production Management

Journal Information


CiteScore 2016: 0.48

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2016: 0.126
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2016: 0.551

Cited By

Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 272 210 16
PDF Downloads 201 183 5