Imagine you are a member of the ERP undertaking maneuvering commission. Your undertaking is to urge a theoretical account or model for the rating of the three ERP package sellers. To make this you will necessitate to research package seller choice theoretical accounts and sketch the advantages and disadvantages of these theoretical accounts. You must besides take a theoretical account that you believe is best suited to measuring each package seller ‘s merchandise and services.
Enterprise resource planning ( ERP ) package is one of dearly-won and important undertakings for concern investing. Due to the choice standards of ERP package are legion and fuzziness, choosing the optimum ERP package is a critical procedure in the early stage of an ERP undertaking. We propose a fuzzed analytic hierarchy procedure ( FAHP ) theoretical account, which involves more comprehensive point of view for the package quality. In this FAHP theoretical account, there are 32 standards sifted out from merchandise facet and direction facet. We find out that both clip and cost issue are significantly of import in both two instances. We besides find that these two instances exist diverse precedences between weights of standards.
Choosing an equal endeavor resource planning ( ERP ) system for the organisation is one of the important issues in an ERP undertaking. This survey proposes a three-phase ERP choice systematic model which introduces in two rule issues: the McCall package quality theoretical account with project direction point of view and the quantitative analysis of fuzzed analytic hierarchy procedure ( FAHP ) .
In this FAHP theoretical account, there are 19 standards sifted out and a real-world practical instance is used to exemplify the application of the model. We find out the ‘cost ‘ is significantly of import of all factors in this ERP undertaking. We besides find ‘correctness ‘ is the most of import standards among the package quality factor of ERP package.
As a planetary leader with a wide portfolio of taking merchandises, engineerings and trade names, Caterpillar is everlastingly puting higher criterions by keeping a alert oculus on the ever-changing displacement in regional kineticss and reacting with new merchandise inventions and fabricating flexibleness.
Caterpillar ‘s wide portfolio of merchandises, services and engineerings fall into three chief lines of concern: machinery, engines and fiscal merchandises.
Recognizes as the best in its industry, Caterpillar needs the best tool for back uping their concern so that it can easy accomplish its aims. Such a tool can merely be fulfilled by the best system, which is known as ERP system.
Because of the complexness of ERP package, the restriction of available resources and the diverseness of options, choice of ERP merchandise is clip devouring and boring undertaking ( Wei and Wang, 2004 ) . Hence, full engagement in the choice procedure is really of import and it should be regarded as a big undertaking ( Wognum et al, 2004 ) .
Besides that, a comprehensively systematic choice policy for ERP system is of import to the success of ERP undertaking. This research proposes a systematic model to choose ERP system.
One is extraction from undertaking direction necessities by following the McCall package quality theoretical account and utilizing the factors of that theoretical account to be some of the ERP choice standards. Another option is utilizing fuzzed analytic hierarchy procedure ( FAHP ) method to measure the choice of ERP system. Our aim on this research is to find the theoretical account that considers package quality features and work out the multi-criteria decision-making ( MCDM ) jobs and expedites group fuzzy MCDM procedure. This research combines both FAHP and the ISO 9126 criterion so that it can give the best consequence for Caterpillar ‘s Executive in doing their determination.
3. Software Vendor Selection Models – Literature Reappraisal
A important portion of the ERP choice procedure is the choice of the seller. Some of import factors that should be considered include their concerns and restraints of the organisation and its industry, sellers ‘ ability and length of service to run into future demands, apprehension of the demands, their expertness of support and aid in the execution procedure and their system accomplishments and cognition ( Verville and Halingten, 2003 ) .
3.1 ERP Software Selection Method
The figure of surveies have been analyzed assorted methods either quantitative or qualitative to optimise, mark, rank and MCDM analysis the ERP system or other information engineering ( IT ) system choice job. While Scott and Kaindl ( 2000 ) proposed a conceptual theoretical account for ERP bundle sweetening, Verville and Halingten ( 2003 ) besides suggested a six-stage theoretical account to measure ERP package. Some other companies prefer the fiscal attack to measure such systems ( Farbey et al. , 1992, Han, 2004 ) . However, the quantitative methods were more frequent been used. Different from Buss ( 1983 ) who introduced a superior method in the beginning periods of IT undertakings, Rao ( 2000 ) assessed ERP package bundle utilizing determination tree. Kumar et Al. ( 2002 ) implemented basic statistics in a existent ERP choice instance. Other methods of mathematical optimisation methods such as 0-1 binary scheduling, end scheduling and non-linear scheduling are besides loosely been implemented ( Lee and Kim, 2000, Santhanam and Kyparisis, 1995, 1996, Talluri, 2000 ) . Dissimilar to the above method, several documents used analytic hierarchy procedure ( AHP ) to be the analytical tool ( Schniderjans and Wilson, 1991, Wei et al. , 2005 ) .
3.2 Selection Criteria of ERP Software
Besides the most of import factors of monetary value and clip, the seller ‘s support is besides important for ERP undertaking choice ( Langenwalter, 2000 ) . This factor determines the organisations ‘ possible disbursal of one-year care and human resource cost ( Butler, 1999, Bingi et al. , 1999 ) . Hence, Wei and Wang ( 2004 ) divided three classs to choose an ERP system consists of undertaking, package system and seller factors. Everdingen et Al. ( 2000 ) explored that provider and package system are the major standards incorporating 10 sub standards for choosing an ERP system. Even, the precedences of standards between small-medium sized and big sized company are different ( Bernroider and Koch, 2001 ) . Later, Holland and Light ( 1999 ) found that the system integrating between ERP system and bing information systems is a farther proficient job that might mire the full ERP undertaking. In world, choosing a suited ERP undertaking incorporated multiple factors, and assessment evaluations are normally evaluated in lingual footings, ‘high ‘ , ‘poor ‘ , among others. Subsequently, Wei and Wang ( 2004 ) found that a fuzzed MCDM method is really utile in incorporating assorted lingual rating and weights for the choice procedure.
3.3 Management Criteria
As mentioned above, the choice standards of ERP system consist of three major standards: clip factors, cost factors and seller factors. Then, the clip factors can be divided into three sub-criteria, cost factors into four and seller factors can be separated out into four sub-criteria. The entire 11 standards are classified as direction standards and the item properties are as follows,
- Sub-criteria of seller factors: service and support, industrial certificate, market portion and repute, developing solution.
- Sub-criteria of cost factors: staff preparation cost, one-year care cost, hardware cost, package cost.
- Sub-criteria of clip factors: clip for BPR and system tuning, clip for planning and readying, clip for proving and go-live.
However, merely a few researches had incorporated undertaking direction point of view in choosing ERP system. Despite all of that, the three chief parts of the undertaking are clip, cost and performance/technology. Among three of them, performance/technology is the most of import one ( Kerzner, 2001 ) . Badri et Al. ( 2001 ) manage undertaking standards consisting cost, benefits, hazard, clip restraint and public presentation into IT choice job ; nevertheless, they did non specify “ performance/ engineering ” , the most important substance of a undertaking.
3.4 Software Quality Model
Consequently, we propose the McCall package quality factors ( McCall et al. , 1977 ) to be constituent of the performance/technology standards in ERP undertaking. He recommended a paradigm incorporating 11 standards. McCall package quality theoretical account incorporates a utile categorization of factors that affect package quality. Those package choice factors focus on three important facets of a package merchandise: its operational features, ability to undergo alteration, and adaptability to new environments. Boehm et Al. ( 1978 ) broaden the properties of package and involved 19 standards. Grady and Caswell ( 1987 ) specified five major factors consisting 24 features for package quality and known as FURPS theoretical account. The difference of those theoretical accounts is chiefly on their nomenclature. The ISO 9126 package quality theoretical account dwelling of six cardinal properties is chosen to explicate the characteristic and we classify it as merchandise facet in the theoretical account. The elaborate properties are as follows ( Bache and Bazzana, 1994 ) .
a ) Functionality
This property is defined as the degree to which the package maps satisfy implied or stated demand and can be divided into five sub-characteristics ( suitableness, truth, interoperability, conformity and security ) .
B ) Dependability
This property is defined as the capableness of package to keep its degree of public presentation under stated conditions for a declared period of clip. It can be broken down into three sub-characteristics ( adulthood, mistake tolerance and recoverability ) .
degree Celsius ) Serviceability
This property is defined as the degree to which the package is ready for usage and can be decomposed into three sub-characteristics ( comprehensibility, learn ability and operability ) .
vitamin D ) Efficiency
This property is defined as the degree to which package able to optimise the usage of system resources. It can be divided into two sub-characteristics ( efficiency of clip behaviour and efficiency of resource behaviour ) .
vitamin E ) Maintainability
This property is defined as the preparedness of which fix possibly made to the package and can be decomposed into four sub-characteristics ( analyzability, changeableness, stableness and testability ) .
degree Fahrenheit ) Portability
This property is defined as the ability of package to be transferred from one environment to another. It can be divided into four sub-characteristics ( adaptability, install-ability, conformity and replace-ability ) .
3.5 Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process ( FAHP ) and Fuzzy Set Theory
Herrera and Herrera-Viedma ( 2000 ) stated that human judgements are frequently imprecise and can non be formulated with a sharp numerical value. Hence, Fuzzy set theory is formed for work outing jobs in which description of observations and activities are equivocal, unsure and obscure. Since Buckley ( 1985 ) integrated the fuzzy set theory into the traditional AHP, FAHP were going a suited tool to work out the real-world Multi Criteria Decision Making ( MCDM ) jobs ( Buyukozkan et al. , 2004, Huang and Wu, 2005 ) . Choosing ERP system is besides a fuzzed MCDM job of which should affect undertaking direction point of view. Wei and Wang ( 2004 ) and Wei et Al ( 2005 ) have adopted AHP and FAHP severally for work outing ERP system choice job. However, both of them did non incorporated package quality theoretical account to explicate the public presentation factor. Both of import issues are incorporated by following McCall package quality theoretical account and implementing FAHP rating method. Hence, the three-phase comprehensive model ( designation, seeking and analysing ) eases group fuzzed MCDM procedure in ERP package choice jobs. FAHP had besides been used to measure public conveyance system ( Hsu, 1999 ) and selected e-marketplace package ( Buyukozkan, 2004 ) . A fuzzed multi standards group decision-making attack was presented for choosing constellation points of package development ( Wang and Lin, 2003 ) .
4. Advantages / Disadvantages of Models
4.1 Software Quality Model
From the above literature reappraisal, can be pull the quality features for the four package quality theoretical accounts as follows:
Software Quality Model Advantages:
Though holding some advantages ( in the nonsubjective quantifiability ) , quality theoretical accounts really cut down the construct of quality to a few comparatively simple and inactive properties.
This theoretical account creates relationship between quality features and prosodies, even though non all prosodies are nonsubjective.
Disadvantages of this theoretical account, package merchandise ‘s functionality was non considered straight.
It outlines a hierarchal construction of features as McCall ‘s does, each of which contributes to entire quality.
The other advantage is both of McCall and Boehm ‘s constructs include users demands.
Disadvantages, it besides includes the hardware output features non found in McCall theoretical account.
No suggestion about quality features measuring.
However, its disadvantage is that it can non demo really clearly how those certain choice facets can be measured.
4.2 Analytic Hierarchy Procedure ( AHP )
The advantages of AHP are that it
- Simple, intuitive, and yet has mathematical cogency.
- User friendly
- Encourages a procedure of acquisition, argument and alteration.
- Can ease engagement.
- Accommodates multiple standards.
- Integrates subjective judgements with numerical informations.
- Has commercially developed support such as adept pick
However the disadvantages are:
- The standards chosen largely depends on the researches but the weights assigned are personal points of position ; any other individual could hold reached a wholly different consequence by delegating different weights to criteria & amp ; sub-criteria. Although the method is the same, consequences may alter
- The length of the procedure, which increases with the figure of degrees and figure of pair-wise determinations
- Different size of the company can bring forth different consequence.
- The disbursal of the commercial package that makes the attack practical.
Based on the above description and analysis, we found the ISO 9126 is the most desirable theoretical account among all the quality theoretical accounts in this paper, irrespective of some restrictions.
This theoretical account considers the comprehensibility and functionality of the package, of which can non be explained by McCall ‘s theoretical account. Those issues are rather of import relating to the ERP package choice as they besides related to the direction standard of clip and cost factors. However, how those certain choice facets can be measured by using one of the rating techniques such as AHP ( Analysis Hierarchy Process ) .
Ranking, hiting and AHP methods do non use to jobs holding resource feasibleness, optimisation demands or undertaking mutuality belongings restraints. In malice of this restriction, practicians have used the AHP method with existent jobs, because of its simpleness and user-friendliness. The user-friendliness of the AHP method allows complex jobs to be structured in the signifier of a hierarchy, where each factor and option can be identified and evaluated with regard to other related factors.
AHP enables the decision-makers to construction a complex job in the signifier of a simple hierarchy and to measure a big figure of quantitative and qualitative factors in a systematic mode, under conflicting multiple standards.
AHP technique has been chosen as the most appropriate technique for burdening the developed value, standards and sub-criteria in ERP package choice.
In add-on, Fuzzy logic has been chosen because its ability to extenuate the effects of equivocal or obscure descriptions applied by the building organisations. The usage of fuzzed sets provides a really powerful tool for widening the capableness of binary logic in ways that enable a much better representation of this cognition. Both of the techniques are combined together into FAHP theoretical account.
This paper proposes a systematic MCDM theoretical account to choose an appropriate ERP system. This model combines ERP package quality factors and FAHP, which offers decision-makers a more comprehensive point of view and besides suggestions decision-makers an effectual and efficiency process.
The process introduces ISO 9126 criterion to construe the quality features of ERP package, hence, a more specialised overall construct is conducted for ERP choice job.
The proposed model contributes two major advantages:
- Uniting the McCall and ISO 9126 package quality theoretical accounts to construe the public presentation term of undertaking direction, a more complete and flexible overall model is conducted for ERP choice job.
- Adopting FAHP method is more practical to work out the real-world MCDM jobs. A successful instance is applied to turn out our proposed theoretical account is practical for usage.
Bache, R. & A ; Bazzana, G. ( 1994 ) . Software Metrics for Product Assessment. McGraw-Hill, England.
Badri, M. A. , Davis, D. and Davis D. ( 2002 ) A comprehensive 0-1 end programming theoretical account for undertaking choice. International Journal of Project Management, 19, 243-252.
Bernroider, E. & A ; Koch, S. ( 2001 ) . ERP choice procedure in midsized and big organisations. Business Process Management Journal 7 ( 3 ) , 251-257.
Bingi, P. , Sharma, M.K. & A ; Godla, J.K. ( 1999 ) . Critical issues impacting and ERP execution. Information Systems Management 16 ( 3 ) , 30-36.
Boehm, B.W. , Brown, J.R. , Kaspar, H. , Lipow, M. MacLeod, F.J. & A ; Merritt, M.J. ( 1978 ) . Features of Software Quality. TRW Series of Software Technologies 1, North-Holland, Amsterdam.
Buckley, J.J. ( 1985 ) . Fuzzy hierarchal analysis. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 17, 233-247.
Buss, M.D.J. ( 1983 ) . How to rank computing machine undertakings. Harvard Business Review 61 ( 1 ) , 118-125.
Butler, J. ( 1999 ) . Risk direction accomplishments needed in a packaged package environment. Information System Management 16 ( 3 ) , 15-20.
Buyukozkan, G. ( 2004 ) . Multi-criteria determination doing for e-marketplace choice. Internet Research-Electronic Networking Applications and Policy 14 ( 2 ) , 139-154.
Buyukozkan, G. , Kahraman, C. & A ; Ruan, D. ( 2004 ) . A fuzzed multi-criterial determination attack for package development scheme choice. International Journal of General Systems 33 ( 2-3 ) , 259-280.
Everdingen, Y.V. , Hillegersberg, J.V. & A ; Waarts, E. ( 2000 ) . ERP acceptance by European midsize companies. Association for Calculating Machinery. Communicaitons of the CAM 43 ( 4 ) , 27-31.
Grady, R.B. & A ; Caswell, D.L. ( 1987 ) . Software Prosodies: Establishing a Company-Wide Program, Prentice-Hill.
Han, S. W. ( 2004 ) ERP-Enterprise resource planning: A cost based concern instance and execution appraisal. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing, 14 ( 3 ) , 239-256.
Herrera, F. & A ; Herrera-Viedma, E. ( 2000 ) . Linguistic determination analysis: stairss for work outing determination jobs under lingual information. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 115, 67-82.
Holland, C.P. & A ; Light, B. ( 1999 ) . A critical success factors model for ERP execution. IEEE Software 16 ( 3 ) , 30-36.
Hsu, T.H. ( 1999 ) . Public conveyance system undertaking rating utilizing the analytic hierarchy procedure: a fuzzed Delphi attack. Transportation Planning and Technol 22, 229-246.
Huang, L. C. & A ; Wu, R.Y.H. ( 2005 ) . Using fuzzed analytic hierarchy procedure in the managerial endowment appraisal model-An empirical survey in Taiwan ‘s semiconducting material industry. International Journal of Technology Management 30 ( 1/2 ) , 105-130.
Kerzner, H. ( 2001 ) Undertaking Management: A Systems Approach to Planning, Scheduling, and Controlling. John Wiley & A ; Sons, Inc. New York.
Kumar, V. , Maheshwari, B. & A ; Kumar, U. ( 2002 ) . Enterprise resource planning system acceptance procedure: a study of Canadian organisations. International Journal of Production Research 40 ( 3 ) , 509-523
Langenwalter, G.A. ( 2000 ) . Enterprise Resources Planning and Beyond Integrating Your Entire Organization. CRC Press LLC, Florida.
Lee, J.W. & A ; Kim, S.H. ( 2000 ) . Using analytic web procedure and end scheduling for mutualist information system undertaking choice. Computers & A ; Operations Research 27, 367-382.
McCall, J. , Richards, P. & A ; Walters, G. ( 1977 ) . Factors in Software Quality. NTIS ADA049-014, 015, 055.
Rao, S.S. ( 2000 ) . Enterprise resource planning: concern demands and engineerings. Industrial Management & A ; Data Systems 100 ( 2 ) , 81-88.
Santhanam, R. and Kyparisis, G. J. ( 1995 ) A multiple standard determination theoretical account for information system undertaking choice. Computer & A ; Operations Research, 22 ( 8 ) , 807-818.
Santhanam, R. and Kyparisis, G. J. ( 1996 ) A determination theoretical account for mutualist information system undertaking choice. European Journal of Operation Research, 89, 380-399.
Schniederjans, M. J. & A ; Wilson, R.L. ( 1991 ) . Using the analytic hierarchy procedure and end scheduling for information system undertaking choice. Information & A ; Management 20, 333-342.
Scott, J. E. & A ; Kaindl, L. ( 2000 ) . Enhancing functionality in an endeavor package bundle. Information & A ; Management 37, 111-122.
Talluri, S. ( 2000 ) . An IT/IS acquisition and justification theoretical account for supply-chain direction. International Journal of Physical Distribution & A ; Logistics 30 ( 3/4 ) , 221-237.
Verville, J. & A ; Halingten, A. ( 2003 ) . A Six-Stage theoretical account of the purchasing procedure for ERP package. Industrial Marketing Management 32, 585-594.
Wang, J. & A ; Lin, Y.I. ( 2003 ) . A fuzzed multicriteria group determination doing attack to choose constellation points for package development. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 134, 343-363.
Wei, C.C. , Chien, C.F. & A ; Wang, M.J. ( 2005 ) . An AHP-based attack to ERP system choice. International Journal of Production Economics 96, 47-62.
Wei, C. C. and Wang, M. J. ( 2004 ) A comprehensive model for choosing an ERP system. International Journal of Project Management, 22, 161-169
Wognum, P. M. , Krabbendam, J. J. , Buhl, H. , Ma, X. and Kenett, R. ( 2004 ) Bettering endeavor system support-A casebase attack. Advanced Engineering Informatics, 18 ( 4 ) , 241-253.