Introduction

Implementation of ERP systems is widely recognized (Parr, Shanks, and Darke, 1999; Ambrosio, 1997; Fine, 1995; Gartner Group, 1998; Horwitt, 1998; Stedman, 1998a, 1998b; Martin, 1998; Piszczalski, 1997; Tebbe, 1997) as both problematic, and likely to overrun time and budget allocations for the actual implementation project. Of course IT projects do have a history of having such problems but ERP implementations are more intractable than most. Martin (1998) reported that over 90% of ERP implementations were late and/or over budget; some have terminated in expensive legal actions (James, 1997; Shanks et al., 2000); and the popular literature (Infoweek, Computerworld, etc.) contains numerous stories which describe ERP implementations in colourful terms, such as ‘endurance’ tests, ‘fiascos’, ‘living to tell about it’, and ‘war stories’ (see, for example, Tebbe, 1997; Horwitt, 1998).

In response to these problems, the academic literature has taken a two-pronged approach. First, it has focused on CSFs (Parr, Shanks, and Darke, 1999; Holland, Light, and Gibson, 1999; Sumner, 2000; Shanks et al., 2000; Parr and Shanks, 2000b) for implementation of ERP systems. Secondly, it has developed process models of successful implementation (Bancroft, 1996; Bancroft, Seip, and Sprengel, 1998; Markus and Tanis, 2000; Holland, Light, and Gibson, 1999; Parr, Shanks, and Darke, 1999; Ross, 1998). Both approaches aim to achieve more successful implementation and deeper insight into the process.