Content uploaded by Ricardo Chiva
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Ricardo Chiva
Content may be subject to copyright.
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
This article was downloaded by:
[Consorci de Biblioteques Universitaries de Catalunya]
On:
24 June 2011
Access details:
Access Details: [subscription number 789296667]
Publisher
Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-
41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
The Service Industries Journal
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713636505
The importance of management innovation and consultant services on ERP
implementation success
Rafael Lapiedraa; Joaquin Alegreb; Ricardo Chivaa
a Department of Business Administration, Universitat Jaume I, Castellón de la plana, Spain b
Department of Management “Juan José Renau Piqueras”, Universidad de Valencia, Valencia, Spain
First published on: 14 March 2011
To cite this Article Lapiedra, Rafael , Alegre, Joaquin and Chiva, Ricardo(2011) 'The importance of management
innovation and consultant services on ERP implementation success', The Service Industries Journal,, First published on:
14 March 2011 (iFirst)
To link to this Article: DOI: 10.1080/02642069.2011.556189
URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02642069.2011.556189
Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf
This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or
systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or
distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.
The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents
will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses
should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss,
actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly
or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
The importance of management innovation and consultant services on
ERP implementation success
Rafael Lapiedra
a
∗, Joaquin Alegre
b
and Ricardo Chiva
a
a
Department of Business Administration, Universitat Jaume I, Campus Riu sec, Castello
´ndela
plana 12071, Spain;
b
Department of Management “Juan Jose
´Renau Piqueras”, Universidad de
Valencia, Valencia, Spain
(Received 12 July 2010; final version received 17 January 2011)
Enterprise resource planning (ERP) implementation has been an important activity for
improving efficiency. However, an ERP system is a critical investment that can
significantly affect future performance of a company. Many ERP projects report an
unusually high failure rate. This study empirically investigates the involvement of
management consultants in ERP implementation success. The results from our field
survey of 134 ERP end-users in Spanish ceramic tile companies show that ERP
implementation success significantly depends on the quality of consultant services.
The results also indicate the importance of internal management throughout the
learning process. Overall, these findings contribute to a better understanding of how,
or under which organizational conditions, ERP should be implemented.
Keywords: enterprise resource planning; ERP; end-user; information system;
implementation; organizational learning; efficiency; management consultants
Introduction
Enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems are packages designed to integrate a wide
range of business functions to provide a holistic view of the firm from single information
technology (IT) architecture (Klaus, Rosemann, & Gable, 2000). ERP systems are based
on developing a common IT infrastructure and common business processes that will
support integration of the total business activity (Markus, Tanis, & van Fenema, 2000;
Newell, Tansley, & Huang, 2004). Implementation of an ERP system is an extensive,
lengthy, and costly process. Due to their integrative nature, ERP systems are more
complicated to implement than other packages because the implementation process
must be managed as a program of wide-ranging organizational change initiatives rather
than as a software installation effort (Hong & Kim, 2002). If an organization wishes to
deploy an ERP system, it can rarely be done completely in house because of the scale
and complexity of the system. Internal information systems (IS) personnel is often
trapped in daily IS operational problems. ERP systems require multiple kinds of
specialized expertise, and an internal team will not have such requisite knowledge
(Karimi, Somers, & Bhattacherjee, 2007). Consulting firms play an essential role in
almost all ERP implementations, as they bring their technical and business-industry
expertise to the process. The importance of external consultants in ERP implementation
has traditionally been recognized by the literature (Gable, 1991; Robey, Ross, &
Boudreau, 2002; Thong, 2001; Thong, Yap, & Raman, 1996; Umble, Haft, & Umble,
ISSN 0264-2069 print/ISSN 1743-9507 online
#2011 Taylor & Francis
DOI: 10.1080/02642069.2011.556189
http://www.informaworld.com
∗Corresponding author. Email: lapiedra@emp.uji.es
The Service Industries Journal
2011, iFirst Article, 1–13
Downloaded By: [Consorci de Biblioteques Universitaries de Catalunya] At: 12:17 24 June 2011
2003; Wang & Chen, 2006) . The failure rate of ERP implementations has been estimated
at between 60% and 90% (Kwahk & Lee, 2008). Zhang, Lee, Huang, Zhang and Huang
(2005) state that ERP implementation projects are, on average, 178% over budget, take 2.5
times as long as intended, and deliver only 30% of promised benefits. Rao (2000) estimates
that only 3.6% of ERP implementation projects finish on time, on budget, without
technical problems, and achieve their objectives. The purpose of this study is to contribute
to improving these high failure rates. Given the low success rate of ERP implementation,
a deeper understanding of this process is essential. The aim of this study is to investigate
the impact of organizational learning capability (OLC) and consultant quality on ERP
system success.
ERP systems are often associated with fundamental organizational changes, and some
studies indicate that a major reason for failure lies in user resistance to change (Lapointe &
Rivard, 2005; Nah, Tan, & Teh, 2004). In fact, many ERP-related studies have tradition-
ally focused on internal users, by stressing the importance of an organizational culture
oriented to change and learning (Ke & Wei, 2008; Kwahk & Lee, 2008; Lapointe &
Rivard, 2005; Nah et al., 2004).
Ke and Wei (2008) affirm that ERP implementation success is positively related to
organizational culture along the dimensions of learning and development, participative
decision making, support and collaboration, and tolerance for risks and conflicts. Conse-
quently, the concept of OLC, defined as the organizational and managerial characteristics
or factors that facilitate the organizational learning process or allow an organization to
learn (Chiva, Alegre, & Lapiedra, 2007; Goh & Richards, 1997), might prove essential
for ERP implementation. OLC is conceived as a construct with five different dimensions:
experimentation, risk taking, interaction with the external environment, dialogue, and
participative decision making (Chiva et al., 2007). However, this direct relationship
between external consultants and ERP implementation might be influenced by internal
actors, such as users, as they have to understand and learn what is embedded in the
system or proposed by the consultants (Wang & Chen, 2006). Therefore, OLC might
affect the relationship between external consultants and ERP implementation. The main
aim of this research is to highlight the contribution of OLC to the process of ERP
consultation. To our knowledge, no other empirical research has investigated the role of
OLC in the relationship between external consultants and ERP implementation success.
The basic proposition underlying this research is that external consultants of a high
quality lead to effective ERP implementation, as perceived by the users. Building on
this, we further propose that the relationship between external consultant quality and
ERP implementation success is contingent upon the level of OLC. Hypotheses will be
tested in the Spanish ceramic industry. Results are obtained from questionnaire responses
from 134 ERP end-users in 15 Spanish ceramic tile companies.
This paper is structured as follows: first, we review the theoretical context and outline
the hypotheses; secondly, we describe our research methodology; thirdly, we develop and
test a model that analyses the relationship of OLC and consultant quality with ERP
implementation success. Finally, we reflect on the implications of our study and conclude
with some suggestions for future research.
Theoretical background and hypotheses
ERP implementation success: end-user computing satisfaction
The literature uncovers many different factors that could cause problems in the implemen-
tation of ERP systems (Karimi et al., 2007). ERP systems were designed to solve the
2R. Lapiedra et al.
Downloaded By: [Consorci de Biblioteques Universitaries de Catalunya] At: 12:17 24 June 2011
problem of information fragmentation in large organizations by consolidating all business
operations into a uniform system environment to improve delivery of critical information
to users and improve data consistency. Furthermore, they use database technology to
control and integrate all the information related to a company and involve many employ-
ees from different business units, including internal IT specialists, who have to work
jointly with external parties such as vendors and consultants (Ke & Wei, 2008). This
large scale of integration makes ERP implementation a highly complex and interdepen-
dent task (Sharma & Yetton, 2003; White, Anderson, Schroeder, & Tupy, 1982).
There are many published reports about the high failure rate in ERP implementations.
However, no consensus has been reached on the measures to define the success of ERP
system implementation. The literature describes different measures of ERP implemen-
tation success:
(1) end-user computer satisfaction (Al-Mahshari, Al-Mudimimig, & Zairi, 2003; Ang,
Sum, & Yeo, 2002; Somers, Nelson, & Karimi, 2003; Yusuf, Gunasekaran, &
Abthorpe, 2004),
(2) intended business performance improvements (Al-Mahshari et al., 2003; Hong &
Kim, 2002; Mandal & Gunasekaran, 2002; Yusuf et al., 2004),
(3) implementation on time (Hong & Kim, 2002; Mabert, Soni, & Venkatraman, 2003),
(4) implementation within budget (Hong & Kim, 2002; Mabert et al., 2003), and
(5) system acceptance and use (Ang et al., 2002; Yusuf et al., 2004).
In our opinion, system acceptance and use is not an appropriate criterion to measure
the success of ERP implementation, because the use of the system is mandatory or
required. Whether the quality of the system itself and the information outputs are satisfy-
ing or not, and whether the users want to use the system or not, there is no choice for the
user; users have to accept and use the system. We also consider the time and cost criteria to
be inappropriate to measure implementation success, since even if ERP system implemen-
tation exceeds contracted delivery time and budget, firms may still regard their ERP
implementation as successful. Finally, company performance is a general assessment
that may be influenced by many other internal and external factors.
User satisfaction is regarded as the best surrogate measure of IS success (Wu & Wang,
2006). End-user computing satisfaction (EUCS) is defined as the extent to which users
believe that the IS available to them meets their information requirements (Ives, Hamilton,
& Davis, 1980). Delone and Mclean (1992) identified three reasons to justify the choice of
end-user satisfaction as a widely used measure of IS success: high degree of face validity,
development of reliable tools to measure with, and conceptual weakness and unavailability
of other measures. The study of Somers et al. (2003) shows that the EUCS instrument may
be used to evaluate ERP systems in organizations. An increasing number of researchers are
now considering user satisfaction as a valid measure of ERP implementation success
(Yusuf et al., 2004). Based on these experiences, we also consider user satisfaction as
the best measure of ERP implementation success. A better understanding of the factors
that may influence user satisfaction should be reached in order for ERP systems to be
used effectively.
Consultant quality: ERP implementation
The prominent role played by external consultants has frequently been highlighted by the
literature (Simon & Welsh, 2010; Thong, 2001; Thong, Yap, & Raman, 1994; Thong et al.,
1996). External consultants play a crucial role in the outcome of ERP implementation.
The Service Industries Journal 3
Downloaded By: [Consorci de Biblioteques Universitaries de Catalunya] At: 12:17 24 June 2011
Consultant quality is related to the extent of support, help, and work that consultants
provide during the ERP implementation process.
Competent consultants have knowledge about methodologies and experience from
real system implementations (Al-Mahshari et al., 2003; Bingi, Sharma, & Godla, 1999;
Fuller-Love, 2009; Lin, 2010). According to McGivern (1983), when a company hires the ser-
vices of an external consultant, the crucial factor for reaching the project goals is the quality
of the client–consultant relationship. Wang and Chen (2006) emphasize the importance of
effective communication between user and consultant as a key aspect for a productive
relationship. Communication effectiveness describes the extent to which consultants and
users can understand each other throughout the consulting process. ERP consultants need to
understand the details of existing client business practices (Al-Mahshari et al., 2003; Cater
& Cater, 2009), and to translate the ERP requirements to the organization and process
levels (Gulledge, 2006; Rettig, 2007). Therefore, consultants should have good interpersonal
skills and be able to work with people as a team (Wakkee, Elfring, & Monaghan, 2010).
Intensive information and knowledge sharing is a prerequisite for effective implemen-
tation (Warren, Patton, & Bream, 2009). More effective communication will improve the
probability of delivering a configuration that fits more closely with client requirements
(Wang & Chen, 2006). Clients and consultants may not have similar approaches to
facing problems, and this may bring further conflicts to the relationship (Hemphill,
2010; Yang, Tu, & Yang, 2009). Both parties must learn how to perform in conflict
situations and come up with a mutually beneficial solution (Robey, Smith, & Vijayasarathy,
1993). In summary, according to McLahlin (1999), competent consultants must have
sufficient technical knowledge, but also good management and communication skills in
order to recommend effective solutions.
Consequently, effective consultants are crucial in the delivery of a high-quality ERP
system. Given the potential impact that consultant quality has on successful ERP
implementation, the following hypothesis is proposed.
H1: ERP consultant quality will be positively related to successful ERP implementation.
OLC: ERP implementation
The literature on ERP implementation success has mainly focused on two aspects: exter-
nal, which is associated with the role of consultants, and internal, which underlines the role
of the organizational and cultural context. Appleton (1997) shows that many ERP projects
fail to achieve the anticipated benefits because managers underestimate the efforts
involved in managing change. According to Somers et al. (2003), only 10% of new IS
failures can be attributed to technological problems. Therefore, the human element has
become a critical determinant of IS success (Martinsons & Chong, 1999). Users play an
important role in ERP implementation success (Mahmood, Burn, Gemoets, & Jacquez,
2000). As they have to learn from the external consultants, the direct relationship
between external consultants and ERP implementation might be influenced by how the
users behave or how they carry out their work (Wang & Chen, 2006).
Some literatures on ERP implementation have stressed the importance of an organiz-
ational culture oriented to change and learning (Ke & Wei, 2008; Kwahk & Lee, 2008;
Lapointe & Rivard, 2005; Nah et al., 2004, Shang, 2009). Some studies indicate that a
major reason for failure was user resistance to change (Browning, Edgar, Gray, &
Garrett, 2009; Lapointe & Rivard, 2005; Nah et al., 2004). Ke and Wei (2008) affirm
that ERP implementation success is positively related to organizational culture along
the dimensions of learning and development, participative decision making, support and
4R. Lapiedra et al.
Downloaded By: [Consorci de Biblioteques Universitaries de Catalunya] At: 12:17 24 June 2011
collaboration, and tolerance for risks and conflicts. Subsequently, the concept of OLC,
defined as the organizational and managerial characteristics or factors that facilitate the
organizational learning process or allow an organization to learn (Chiva et al., 2007;
Goh & Richards, 1997), might prove essential for ERP implementation. The OLC
factors are experimentation, risk taking, interaction with the external environment,
dialogue, and participative decision making (Chiva et al., 2007).
Experimentation can be defined as the degree to which new ideas and suggestions are
attended to and dealt with sympathetically. Nevis, DiBella, and Gould (1995) consider
that experimentation involves trying out new ideas, being curious about how things work,
or carrying out changes in work processes. Risk taking can be understood as the tolerance
of ambiguity, uncertainty, and errors. Sitkin (1996) goes as far as to state that failure is an
essential requirement for effective organizational learning, and to this end, examines the
advantages and disadvantages of success and errors. Interaction with the external environ-
ment is defined as the scope of relationships with the external environment. The external
environment of an organization is defined as factors that are beyond the organization’s
direct control of influence. Environmental characteristics play an important role in learning,
and their influence on organizational learning has been studied by a number of researchers.
Dialogue is defined as a sustained collective inquiry into the processes, assumptions, and
certainties that make up everyday experience (Isaacs, 1993). Some authors (Dixon, 1997;
Isaacs, 1993; Schein, 1993) understand dialogue to be vitally important to organizational
learning. Participative decision making refers to the level of influence employees have in
the decision making process (Cotton, Vollrath, Foggat, Lengnick-Hall, & Jennings, 1988).
Therefore, an organizational context with a high degree of OLC fosters experimen-
tation, risk taking, dialogue, interaction with the external environment, and participative
decision making. These factors might facilitate the effective use and learning of an ERP
system by the users in an organization. If end-users usually experiment, dialogue, take
risks, or participate, they will be more likely to adapt easily to the requirements and
necessities of an ERP system; they will cooperate efficiently with external consultants,
by making suggestions or corrections; they will learn how to use it; and finally, they
will be more satisfied with the system (Figure 1). These lines of argument allow us to
propose the following hypothesis.
H2: OLC will be positively related to successful ERP implementation.
Research methodology
Sample
We conducted a field study to test the effect of consultant quality OLC on successful ERP
implementation. Specifically, we surveyed ERP end-users in 15 companies from the Spanish
Figure 1. The proposed research model.
The Service Industries Journal 5
Downloaded By: [Consorci de Biblioteques Universitaries de Catalunya] At: 12:17 24 June 2011
ceramic tile sector. Most of the firms from this sector are considered to be small and medium
sized enterprises, as they do not exceed an average of 250 workers. Ceramic tile production is
a globalized industry whose features belong to the scale-intensive and to the science-based
trajectories of Pavitt’s taxonomy (Alegre, Lapiedra, & Chiva, 2004). In 2003, the Spanish
ceramic tile industry was the world’s biggest exporter, and its production represented almost
half of EU production (Ascer, 2009; Chamber of Commerce of Valencia, 2004).
The fieldwork was carried out from September to December 2008. With the help of
ALICER (Spanish Technological Institute of Ceramic Design) technicians, we identified
15 ceramic tile manufacturers that had recently implemented an ERP system using consul-
tancy services. We sent an introductory letter with copies of the questionnaire to the chief
information officer or another top-level executive, who then distributed the questionnaires
among the end-users.
The questionnaire was addressed to ERP end-users and attempted to ascertain their
perception of their level of satisfaction with the ERP, consultant quality, and OLC in
their organization. We used a 10-point Likert-type scale. It was agreed with the participat-
ing firms that the questionnaire would be answered during working hours. Participating
firms received a feedback report on the survey.
We received a total of 134 valid completed questionnaires from 15 participant firms
(Table 1). Participants were under no obligation to answer the questionnaire. The variation
in non-response could be due to a number of reasons such as lack of time due to work
pressure or low management support for the survey.
The responding companies implemented commercial off-the-shelf systems from
vendors such as Baan, Navision, and Sap. Sixty percent of respondents were male;
31% were 26– 35years old, 57% were 36– 45 years old, and 17% were 46– 55 years old.
All respondents were Spanish; 27% had completed high school studies, 62% had graduate
degrees, and 11% had master’s degrees. End-users typically used the following ERP
modules: finance, production, inventory, human resources, purchasing, and distribution.
End-users had been using the ERP systems for more than 1 year. The average organizational
tenure was 8.8 years. Data came from 15 organizations with the number of respondents per
organization ranging from a minimum of 3 to a maximum of 15.
Table 1. Respondent distribution per firm.
Total number of respondents
FIRM 1 10
FIRM2 15
FIRM3 10
FIRM4 15
FIRM5 4
FIRM6 10
FIRM7 14
FIRM8 3
FIRM9 12
FIRM10 7
FIRM11 6
FIRM12 5
FIRM13 10
FIRM14 7
FIRM15 6
Total 134
6R. Lapiedra et al.
Downloaded By: [Consorci de Biblioteques Universitaries de Catalunya] At: 12:17 24 June 2011
Measures
Consultant quality was assessed using Wang and Chen’s (2006) 18-item measure (Tables
2–4). ERP end-user satisfaction was measured with the Somers et al.’s (2003) 12-item
scale. OLC was assessed using the Chiva et al.’s (2007) 14-item scale. All these measures
are fully given in Tables 2– 4.
Control variables
These variables included gender (1 ¼female and 0 ¼male), age (1 ¼26 –35 years, 2 ¼
36–45 years, and 3 ¼46– 55 years), and education (1 ¼high school, 2 ¼university
Table 2. Items composing the Consulting Quality scale (Wang & Chen, 2006).
Dimension Item
Consultant
quality
V1. The consultants treat us with respect
V2. The consultants get adequate support from their firm to do their jobs well
V3. The consultants treat information about us with complete confidentiality
V4. The consultants try to maintain a lasting and trusting relationship with us
V5. The consultants are helpful with advice on ways to reduce our ERP
implementation efforts
V6. Through training, the consultants effectively transfer to us their knowledge
of ERP implementation and operation
V7. The consulting firm closely supervises any consultants when they are doing
work for us
V8. The consultants give us personal attention
V9. The consultants really understand my needs
V10. The consultants always have our best interests at heart
V11. When we have a problem, the consultants are sympathetic and reassuring
V12. The consultants would hesitate to take on one of my competitors as a client
V13. The consultants would make themselves available outside regular office
hours if we truly needed them
V14. The consultants’ work is error-free
V15. When consultants promise to do something by a certain time, they do so
V16. The consultants return phone calls and inquiries promptly
V17. The consultants reply and inform us, within one day, when services will be
performed
V18. We can trust the consultants
Table 3. Items composing the EUCS scale (Somers et al., 2003).
Dimension Item
Content V1. Does the system provide precise information you need?
V2. Does the information content meet your needs?
V3. Does the system provide reports that seem to be just about exactly what you need?
V4. Does the system provide sufficient information?
Accuracy V5. Is the system accurate?
V6. Are you satisfied with the accuracy of the system?
Format V7. Do you think the output is presented in a useful format?
V8. Is the information clear?
Ease of use V9. Is the system user friendly?
V10. Is the system easy to use?
Timeliness V11. Do you get the information you need in time?
V12. Does the system provide up-to-date information?
The Service Industries Journal 7
Downloaded By: [Consorci de Biblioteques Universitaries de Catalunya] At: 12:17 24 June 2011
graduate degree, and 3 ¼university master’s degree). Employee-based surveys typically
include such control variables (Barrick, Bradley, Kristof-Brown, & Colbert, 2007; Chiva
et al., 2007; Ganzach, 1998). More specifically, previous studies suggest an influence of
gender, age, and education level on job satisfaction, which might be positive or negative
depending on other factors (Bellou, 2010; Clark, Oswald, & Warr, 2007; Fabra-Florit &
Vila-Lladosa, 2007; Jung, Moon, & Hahm, 2007).
Results
Measurement evaluation
All the three measures used in this research have been previously validated (Chiva et al.,
2007; Somers et al., 2003; Wang & Chen, 2006). However, we used
a
reliability to further
assess the measures. Consultant quality computed an
a
of 0.91; OLC computed an
a
of
0.90; and ERP end-user satisfaction computed an
a
of 0.97. Table 5 shows significant
correlations between the main variables: there are clear links between user satisfaction,
Table 4. Items composing the OLC scale (Chiva et al., 2007).
Dimension Item
Experimentation V1. People here receive support and encouragement when presenting new ideas
V2. Initiative often receives a favourable response here, so people feel
encouraged to generate new ideas
Risk taking V3. People are encouraged to take risks in this organization
V4. People here often venture into unknown territory.
Interaction with
the external
environment
V5. It is part of the work of all staff to collect, bring back, and report
information about what is going on outside the company
V6. There are systems and procedures for receiving, collating, and sharing
information from outside the company
V7. People are encouraged to interact with the environment: competitors,
customers, technological institutes, universities, suppliers, etc.
Dialogue V8. Employees are encouraged to communicate
V9. There is a free and open communication within my work group
V10. Managers facilitate communication
V11. Cross-functional teamwork is a common practice here
Participative
decision making
V12. Managers in this organization frequently involve employees in important
decisions
V13. Policies are significantly influenced by the view of employees
V14. People feel involved in main company decisions
Table 5. Descriptive statistics and correlations.
Variables Mean SD 1 2 3
1. Consultant quality 6.21 0.63 0.41∗∗ 0.51∗∗
2. OLC 6.77 1.82 0.41∗∗ 0.88∗
3. User satisfaction 7.14 1.85 0.51∗∗ 0.88∗
Age 38.29 6.76 20.08 0.01 20.03
Gender 1.40 0.49 0.08 0.03 0.02
Education 1.72 0.44 0.13 20.02 20.11
Tenure 8.84 4.38 0.15 0.05 0.08
∗p,0.05.
∗∗p,0.01.
8R. Lapiedra et al.
Downloaded By: [Consorci de Biblioteques Universitaries de Catalunya] At: 12:17 24 June 2011
OLC, and consultant quality in our database. In general terms, user satisfaction, OLC, and
consultant quality reach high levels in the ceramic tile industry.
Hypothesized relationships
To test the hypotheses, we used regression analysis (Table 6). Following the widely
accepted procedures (Barrick et al., 2007; Ganzach, 1998), in Step 1, we entered the
control variables. In Step 2, we added the direct effects of consultant quality and OLC
on user satisfaction. Table 6 reports the results. The Step 2 model shows a dramatic
increase in explanatory power (0.804 vs. 0.020) compared with the Step 1 model. This
implies that the independent variables introduced in the Step 2 model are meaningful vari-
ables, from both a theoretical and an empirical point of view. The Step 2 model provides
support for H1 and H2. Both effects are statistically significant. However, results under-
score that the internal effect (OLC) is substantially higher than the internal effect (consult-
ant quality). This is an interesting finding for ERP users’ satisfaction line of research. It
could be due to benefiting from a homogeneous standard of quality among ERP consult-
ants in the ceramic tile industry. In fact, standard deviation of this variable is reasonably
low (Table 5). This finding also highlights the importance of internal issues that are
directly linked to managerial action.
We introduced several control variables that are frequently used in employee-based
surveys into the model. However, none of these variables showed a significant effect on
user satisfaction. This could be due to the high professional nature of ERP users in
ceramic tile firms.
Discussion
ERP systems are becoming increasingly important for companies and their performance.
Their implementation is a complex process that has received a great deal of attention in
recent years. The huge investment in ERP system packages and the significant differences
in adoption results have led many researchers to search for critical success factors.
However, the underlying process of how these factors affect ERP implementation
success still remains a complex research area. Following Somers et al. (2003), we have
taken the end-user satisfaction as a valid instrument to evaluate the success of ERP
system implementations. This instrument provides not only an overall assessment, but
also the capacity to analyse which aspects of ERP implementation are most problematic.
Table 6. Regression analysis results.
User satisfaction
Step 1 Step 2
Age 20.153 20.074
Gender 0.014 20.032
Education 0.028 20.021
Tenure 0.184 0.063
Consultant quality 0.158∗∗
OLC 0.814∗∗
F(df) 0.64 (4) 86.56 (6)
R
2
0.020 0.804
∗∗p,0.01.
The Service Industries Journal 9
Downloaded By: [Consorci de Biblioteques Universitaries de Catalunya] At: 12:17 24 June 2011
The literature has traditionally underlined the importance of external consultants in
ERP implementation. Our study advances previous research by using end-user satisfaction
to evaluate ERP implementation success and by proposing that a certain organizational
context, namely, one that facilitates organizational learning, may articulate the influence
that internal factors can have on ERP implementation.
First, this research provides empirical evidence that external consultant quality has
a direct positive relationship with ERP implementation, measured through the EUCS,
thus supporting Hypothesis 1. The better the consultant quality, the higher the ERP
end-user satisfaction.
Secondly, we analyse how OLC may affect ERP implementation, thus supporting H2.
Therefore, an organizational context that facilitates learning, experimenting, dialoguing,
and participating will create the appropriate context to introduce successfully a new tech-
nological innovation, such as an ERP system, that may have the potential to imply changes
in the way tasks are performed.
Our study contributes to the literature by supporting the perspective that ERP
implementation success depends on consultant quality. Nevertheless, this positive result
will also be dependent on the level of OLC. End-users must be prepared for the changes
that ERP will bring to the firm. This result is important both for academics and for
practitioners. Successful ERP implementation does not emerge by chance, nor by simply
investing in quality consultants, but rather as the result of a managed process – a process
that fosters an organizational context which facilitates organizational learning. In sum, the
contribution of this research is threefold: first, practitioners and researchers can employ
user satisfaction as a measure of system success in an ERP environment. Second, this
research evaluates the impact of consultant quality and OLC on ERP implementation
success. Third, it uncovers some implications for implementing and managing ERP systems.
This article has implications for practitioners. Even though managers recognize the
importance of selecting good external consultants for ERP implementation success, the
management of the internal context is often an ignored ingredient for its success.
Indeed, we also suggest the importance of a particular context, namely, one that fosters
organizational learning. This study provides additional insights into why OLC is an
essential organizational issue nowadays.
Our results must be viewed in the light of this study’s limitations. The analysis of
measurement scales constitutes an accepted research method that is particularly useful
to test theoretical relationships between concepts such as consultant quality, ERP end-
user satisfaction, and OLC. However, further qualitative research could usefully provide
a more in-depth picture of these relationships.
Because this research is based on a single industry analysis, it has benefited from
dealing with firms that are likely to be economically and technologically homogeneous.
However, it must be stressed that single industry conclusions should be considered with
caution. Future research using different samples and longitudinal studies is necessary.
Further research in other industries is needed to empirically assess the effect of consultant
quality and OLC on ERP implementation success. Validation of a measure requires the
assessment of measurement properties over a variety of samples in similar and different
contexts.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation
(ECO2008-00729) for their financial support for this research.
10 R. Lapiedra et al.
Downloaded By: [Consorci de Biblioteques Universitaries de Catalunya] At: 12:17 24 June 2011
References
Alegre, J., Lapiedra, R., & Chiva, R. (2004). Linking operations strategy and product innovation: An
empirical study of Spanish ceramic tile producers. Research Policy,33(5), 829–839.
Al-Mahshari, M., Al-Mudimimig, A., & Zairi, M. (2003). Enterprise resource planning: A taxonomy
of critical factors. European Journal of Operational Research,146(2), 352–364.
Ang, J.S.K., Sum, C.C., & Yeo, L.N. (2002). A multiple-case design methodology for studying MRP
success and CSFs. Information and Management,39, 271–281.
Appleton, E.L. (1997). How to survive ERP. Datamation,43(3), 50–63.
Ascer. (2009). Economic information of Spanish tile industry. Retrieved from http://spaintiles.info/
esp/sector/informacion.asp
Barrick, M.R., Bradley, B.H., Kristof-Brown, A.L., & Colbert, A.E. (2007). The moderating role of
top management team interdependence: Implications for real teams and working groups.
Academy of Management Journal,50(3), 544–557.
Bellou, V. (2010). Organizational culture as a predictor of job satisfaction: The role of gender and
age. Career Development International,15(1), 4–19.
Bingi, P., Sharma, M.K., & Godla, J. (1999). Critical issues affecting an ERP implementation.
Information Systems Management,16(3), 7–14.
Browning, V., Edgar, F., Gray, B., & Garrett, T. (2009). Realising competitive advantage through
HRM in New Zealand service industries. The Service Industries Journal,29(6), 741–760.
Cater, B., & Cater, T. (2009). Emotional and rational motivations for customer loyalty in business-
to-business professional services. The Service Industries Journal,29(8), 1151–1169.
Chamber of Commerce of Valencia. (2004). Informe de la nueva economı
´a global y su incidencia en
los sectores tradicionales de la Comunidad Valenciana. Valencia: Author.
Chiva, R., Alegre, J., & Lapiedra, R. (2007). Measuring organizational learning capability among the
workforce. International Journal of Manpower,28(3), 224–242.
Clark, A., Oswald, A., & Warr, P. (2007). Is job satisfaction U-shaped in age? Journal of
Occupational and Organizational Psychology,69, 57–82.
Cotton, J.L., Vollrath, D.A., Foggat, K.L., Lengnick-Hall, M.L., & Jennings, K.R. (1988). Employee
participation: diverse forms and different outcomes. Academy of Management Review,131,
8–22.
Delone, W.H., & Mclean, E.R. (1992). Information systems success: The quest for the dependent
variable. Information Systems Research,3(1), 60–95.
Dixon, N. (1997). The hallways of learning. Organizational Dynamics,254, 23–34.
Fabra-Florit, E., & Vila-Lladosa, L.E. (2007). Evaluation of the effects of education on job satisfac-
tion: Independent single-equation vs. structural equation models. International Advances in
Economic Research,13(2), 157–171.
Fuller-Love, N. (2009). Formal and informal networks in small businesses in the media industry.
International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal,5(3), 271–284.
Gable, G. (1991). Consultant engagement for computer system selection: A pro-active client role in
small businesses. Information and Management,20(2), 83–93.
Ganzach, Y. (1998). Intelligence and job satisfaction. Academy of Management Journal,41(5),
526–539.
Goh, S., & Richards, G. (1997). Benchmarking the learning capability of organisations. European
Management Journal,15(5), 575–583.
Gulledge, T.R. (2006). ERP gap-fit analysis from a business process orientation. International
Journal of Services and Standards,2(4), 339–348.
Hemphill, E. (2010). Investigation of agency agreement formation: New opportunities for marketing
relationship development in service industries. The Service Industries Journal,30(2), 149–169.
Hong, K.K., & Kim, Y.G. (2002). The critical success factors for ERP implementation: An organ-
izational fit perspective. Information & Management,40, 25–40.
Isaacs, W. (1993). Dialogue, collective thinking, and organizational learning. Organizational
Dynamics,222, 24–39.
Ives, B., Hamilton, J.S., & Davis, G.B. (1980). A framework for research in computer-based
management information systems. Management Science,26(9), 910 –934.
Jung, K., Moon, M.J., & Hahm, S.D. (2007). Do age, gender, and sector affect job satisfaction?
Results from the Korean labor and income panel data. Review of Public Personnel
Administration,27(2), 125–137.
The Service Industries Journal 11
Downloaded By: [Consorci de Biblioteques Universitaries de Catalunya] At: 12:17 24 June 2011
Karimi, J., Somers, T.M., & Bhattacherjee, A. (2007). The impact of ERP implementation on
business process outcomes: A factor-based study. Journal of Management Information
Systems,24(1), 101–134.
Ke, W., & Wei, K.K. (2008). Organizational culture and leadership in ERP implementation.
Decision Support Systems,45, 208–218.
Klaus, H., Rosemann, M., & Gable, G. (2000). What is ERP? Information Systems Frontiers,2(2),
141–162.
Kwahk, K.Y., & Lee, J.N. (2008). The role of readiness for change in ERP implementation:
Theoretical bases and empirical validation. Information & Management,45, 474–481.
Lapointe, L., & Rivard, S. (2005). A multilevel model of resistance to information technology
implementation. MIS Quarterly,29(3), 461–491.
Lin, C.H. (2010). In search of e-service value: Technology-exploitation vs. certainty-seeking online
behaviours. The Service Industries Journal,30(8), 1377–1400.
Mabert, V.A., Soni, A., & Venkatraman, M.A. (2003). Enterprise resource planning: Managing the
implementation process. European Journal of Operational Research,146, 302–314.
Mahmood, M.A., Burn, J.M., Gemoets, L.A., & Jacquez, C. (2000). Variables affecting information
technology end-user satisfaction: A meta-analysis of the empirical literature. International
Journal of Human–Computer Studies,52(4), 751–771.
Mandal, P., & Gunasekaran, A. (2002). Issues in implementing ERP: A case study. European
Journal of Operational Research,146(2), 274–283.
Markus, L.M., Tanis, C., & van Fenema, P.C. (2000). Multisite ERP implementations – the mean-
ings of enterprise and site vary depending on unique organizational circumstances.
Communications on the ACM,43(4), 42–46.
Martinsons, M.G., & Chong, P.K.C. (1999). The influence of human factors and specialist involve-
ment on information systems success. Human Relations,52(1), 123–152.
McGivern, C. (1983). Some facets of the relationship between consultants and clients in organiz-
ations. Journal of Management Studies,20(3), 367–386.
McLahlin, R.D. (1999). Factors for consulting engagement success. Management Decision,37(5),
394–402.
Nah, F.F.-H., Tan, X., & Teh, S.H. (2004). An empirical investigation on end-users’ acceptance of
enterprise systems. Information Resources Management Journal,17(3), 32–53.
Nevis, E., DiBella, A.J., & Gould, J.M. (1995). Understanding organization learning systems. Sloan
Management Review,36(2), 73–85.
Newell, S., Tansley, C., & Huang, J. (2004). Social capital and knowledge integration in an ERP
project team: The importance of bridging and bonding. British Journal of Management,15,
43–57.
Rao, S. (2000). Enterprise resource planning: Business needs and technologies. Industrial Management
&DataSystems,100, 81–98.
Rettig, C. (2007). The trouble with enterprise software. MIT Sloan Management Review,49(1),
21–37.
Robey, D., Ross, J.W., & Boudreau, M.C. (2002). Learning to implement enterprise systems: An
exploratory study of the dialectics of change. Journal of Management Information Systems,
19(1), 17–46.
Robey, D., Smith, L.A., & Vijayasarathy, L.J. (1993). Perceptions of conflict and success in infor-
mation systems development projects. Journal of Management Information Studies,10(1),
123–139.
Schein, E.H. (1993). On dialogue, culture, and organizational learning. Organizational Dynamics,
222, 40–51.
Shang, K.C. (2009). Integration and organisational learning capabilities in third-party logistics
providers. The Service Industries Journal,29(3), 331–343.
Sharma, R., & Yetton, P. (2003). The contingent effects of management support and task inter-
dependence on successful information systems implementation. MIS Quarterly,27(4),
533–555.
Simon, G.L., & Welsh, D.H.B. (2010). International professional service firms: How do they affect
government policy? The Service Industries Journal,30(1), 11–23.
Sitkin, S.B. (1996). Learning through failure. In M. Cohen & L. Sproull (Eds.), Organizational
learning. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
12 R. Lapiedra et al.
Downloaded By: [Consorci de Biblioteques Universitaries de Catalunya] At: 12:17 24 June 2011
Somers, T.M., Nelson, K., & Karimi, J. (2003). Confirmatory factor analysis of the end-user comput-
ing satisfaction instrument: Replication within an ERP domain. Decision Sciences,34(3),
595–621.
Thong, J.Y.L. (2001). Resource constraints and information systems implementation in Singaporean
small businesses. Omega,29(2), 143–156.
Thong, J.Y.L., Yap, C.S., & Raman, K.S. (1994). Engagement of external expertise in information
systems implementation. Journal of Management Information Systems,11(2), 209–231.
Thong, J.Y.L., Yap, C.S., & Raman, K.S. (1996). Top management support, external expertise and
information systems implementation in small businesses. Information Systems Research,7(2),
248–267.
Umble, E.J., Haft, R.R., & Umble, M.M. (2003). Enterprise resources planning: Implementation
procedures and critical success factors. European Journal of Operational Research,146(2),
241–257.
Wakkee, I., Elfring, T., & Monaghan, S. (2010). Creating entrepreneurial employees in traditional
service sectors. The role of coaching and self-efficacy. International Entrepreneurship and
Management Journal,6(1), 1–21.
Wang, E.T.G., & Chen, J.H.F. (2006). Effects of internal support and consultant quality on the
consulting process and ERP system quality. Decision Support Systems,42, 1029–1041.
Warren, L., Patton, D., & Bream, D. (2009). Knowledge acquisition processes during the incubation
of new high technology firms. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal,
5(4), 481–495.
White, E.M., Anderson, J.C., Schroeder, R.G., & Tupy, S.E. (1982). A study of the MRP implemen-
tation process. Journal of Operations Management,2(3), 145–153.
Wu, J., & Wang, Y. (2006). Measuring ERP success: The ultimate users
´view. International Journal
of Operations and Production Management,28(8), 882–903.
Yang, S.C., Tu, C., & Yang, S. (2009). Exploring the solution – the contextual effect on consumer
dissatisfaction and innovativeness in financial service companies. The Service Industries
Journal,29(4), 557–568.
Yusuf, Y., Gunasekaran, A., & Abthorpe, M.K. (2004). Enterprise information systems project
implementation: A case study of ERP in Rolls Royce. International Journal of Production
Economics,87, 251–266.
Zhang, Z., Lee, M.K.O., Huang, P., Zhang, L., & Huang, X. (2005). A framework of ERP systems
implementation success in China: An empirical study. International Journal of Production
Economics,98, 56–80.
The Service Industries Journal 13
Downloaded By: [Consorci de Biblioteques Universitaries de Catalunya] At: 12:17 24 June 2011
