The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/0263-5577.

htm

IMDS 109,5

ERP user satisfaction issues: insights from a Greek industrial giant

Pantelis Longinidis
University of Macedonia, Thessaloniki, Greece, and

628
Received 22 October 2008 Revised 8 January 2009 Accepted 27 January 2009

Katerina Gotzamani
Department of Business Administration, University of Macedonia, Thessaloniki, Greece
Abstract
Purpose Enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems are sophisticated information technologies (ITs) that enable companies to gain noticeable advantages over their rivals. However, these systems are neither a panacea to competition, nor a medium guaranteeing success. Neglecting a number of important factors in ERP systems implementation might very easily lead to failure instead of success. User satisfaction issues are among those factors that have a semantic impact on ERP systems success. In this direction, this paper aims to examine the key factors that constitute ERP users satisfaction and to explore whether ERP users satisfaction varies among different users proles. Design/methodology/approach An instrument is constructed based mainly on previous ERP users satisfaction studies. The instrument is then provided to a sample of 68 users within a Greek energy supply organization and also a personal interview is conducted with the chief information ofcer. Exploratory factor analysis, multiple regression analysis, and statistical inference tests are employed in order to test the research hypotheses. Findings The results indicate that three main components affect the level of satisfaction of an ERP user: interaction with the IT department, pre-implementation processes, and ERP product and adaptability. Furthermore, a different satisfaction level has been traced among users from different departments. Originality/value This paper presents substantive evidence regarding ERP user satisfaction constituents and further suggests appropriate practices to better manage various behavioral aspects of ERP systems. Keywords Manufacturing resource planning, User studies, Greece Paper type Case study

Industrial Management & Data Systems Vol. 109 No. 5, 2009 pp. 628-645 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited 0263-5577 DOI 10.1108/02635570910957623

1. Introduction While complexity is a major characteristic in all functions and elements of business environment there is no doubt that information should be systematically managed to minimize environmental uncertainty and to maximize prots. Information is a valuable source for enterprises. Using all the available information from their external and internal operational environment they are able to adapt strategies, to avoid threats, to utilize opportunities, to change decisions, and to manage effectively all their core and supportive operations. Advances in technology are triggering the interest of companies to consider the management of information more essentially through an information system (IS) acquisition. ISs are technology-based innovations that are created and used by individuals, organizations, and societies (Allen, 2000). Over the last three decades, computer-based

IS have been developed in unique and special ways. This fact induced changes in organizations structures, strategies, and decision-making processes (Mukherji, 2002). The importance of IS, in assisting enterprises to realize their objectives, has been early stressed by authors during the last quarter of the twentieth century. In specic, it is claimed in the literature that their benets vary from simple operational contributions such as promoting sourcing exibility (McFarlan, 1984), changing decision-making authorities and modifying the hierarchical structure (Gurbaxani and Whang, 1991), to advanced strategic contributions such as becoming the main competitive advantage (Porter and Millar, 1985). In recent years the research interest has focused on enterprise systems (ES), a subcategory of IS. According to Shang and Seddon (2002) ES are large-scale organizational systems built around packaged enterprise system software. Enterprise system software (ESS) is a set of packaged application software modules with an integrated architecture, which can be used by organizations as their primary engine for integrating data, processes and information technology, in real time, across internal and external value chains. Some of the substantial outcomes that emerge when companies implement and operate ES are increased productivity and added value (Davenport, 1998), excessive operational performance (McAfee, 2002), integration and process optimization (Davenport et al., 2004), increased rms market value (Meng and Lee, 2007), and noticeable nancial performance (Hendricks et al., 2007). Enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems have the leading role, among all other ES, in companies preference and this is evident from the prole of the ERP market industry. According to AMR Research (see AMR data available at: www.amrresearch. com) the market for ERP software in 2004 was $23.6 billion, in 2005 was $25.4 billion, and in 2006 was $28.8 billion. Fueled by globalization, midmarket growth and other factors, the market for ERP software will reach $47.7 billion by 2011, a compound annual growth rate of almost 11 percent (Woodie, 2005; Franke, 2007). From the rst software solutions, in the 1960s, which had the form of material requirements planning until recently, where on-demand delivery of ERP software is the vendors last innovation, the ERP market has experienced an overall ourishing route despite some disruptions (Violino, 2008). Apparently, ERP systems attracted attention within the IS eld once large and especially US-based corporations begun to install them (Klaus et al., 2000). The perpetual popularity of ERP systems in the marketplace generated the interest of academics and practitioners to explore in depth all the organizational aspects that have an impact on them. The vast body of literature related to ERP systems might be characterized as falling into ve groups. First, there is a body literature aiming to reveal the benets arisen from ERP systems implementation (Velcu, 2007; Kayas et al., 2008). Second, there is a growing amount of research (Ehie and Madsen, 2005; Ngai et al., 2008) that investigates the critical success factors that assure the effective implementation of ERP systems. A third area of the literature examines the obstacles and the sources of failure in ERP implementation projects (Al-Mashari and Al-Mudimigh, 2003; Kim et al., 2005). A fourth branch (Stefanou, 2001; Skok and Legge, 2002) analyzes the metrics and frameworks that enable companies to evaluate their ERP systems and projects. Finally, a corpus of literature studies the perspectives, the perceptions, and the behavioral expressions of the main participants and stakeholders (management staff, ERP users, ERP vendors) in an ERP project (Amoako-Gyampah, 2004; Inedo, 2007).

ERP user satisfaction issues 629

IMDS 109,5

630

This paper falls in the last area of research, focusing further on the issues related to ERP users satisfaction. It is motivated by the semantic impact of ERP users satisfaction in the success of an ERP project. In particular, the primary focus of the paper is to identify those factors affecting the satisfaction level of ERP users and the corresponding human resource strategies necessary to effectively manage these factors. The rest of the paper is structured in ve sections. The Section 2 discusses the body of literature related to: the importance of users satisfaction in ERP system success and IS user satisfaction denition and measurement. Section 3 presents the research methodology employed in this study. Section 4 illustrates the results of the research and section ve discusses the main ndings. The paper concludes with the managerial implications arisen from this study, its limitations and some further research directions. 2. Review of the literature 2.1 The importance of users satisfaction in ERP system success Attitudes of ERP users are principal determinants of an ERP project success (Abdinnour-Helm et al., 2003). A number of behavioral factors inuence, either directly or indirectly, ERP users satisfaction and this in turn contributes to an effective ERP implementation (Amoako-Gyampah, 2007; Chang et al., 2008). User satisfaction has been employed as a metric for IS success from the early years of IS evaluation. Powers and Dickson (1973) argued that user satisfaction is the salient criterion in evaluating computer systems success. Zmud (1978) suggested that there are three components of management information system (MIS) success: user performance, MIS usage, and user satisfaction. DeLone and McLean (1992) introduced a comprehensive taxonomy of six major categories of IS success where user satisfaction was the most widely used single measure. More recently the importance of user satisfaction in determining ERP projects success has been stressed by many researchers and specic instruments were built in order to measure and assess the level of ERP users satisfaction (Somers et al., 2003; Calisir and Calisir, 2004; Zviran et al., 2005; Holsapple et al., 2006; Wu and Wang, 2006, 2007). This focus can be attributed to several factors, including the radical behavioral changes involved in these systems implementation and most importantly, the failure of other success metrics to trace intangible aspects of these systems. Measures of user satisfaction developed for the conventional data processing environment may not be fully appropriate for the ERP context because the ERP environment differs from those of conventional data processing systems (Wu and Wang, 2006). Hence, it becomes extremely important to enrich literature with improved measurement instruments to explore ERP users satisfaction. 2.2 IS users satisfaction denition and measurement While a satisfactory number of studies investigated the denition and measurement of computer user satisfaction (Bailey and Pearson, 1983; Ives et al., 1983; Doll and Torkzadeh, 1988) the rst analogous work in the ERP domain was published in an academic journal in 2003. Somers et al. (2003) utilized the Doll and Torkzadehs (1988) 12-item end-user computer satisfaction (EUCS) instrument in order to evaluate end-user satisfaction with ERP systems and concluded that the EUCS instrument was a valid predictor of ERP user satisfaction while ERP content and ERP format were the most inuencing factors.

Calisir and Calisir (2004) conducted a study aiming to better understand which factors inuence ERP end-user satisfaction. An instrument was constructed and was consisted of 28 items measuring six interface usability characteristics, namely: system capability, compatibility, exibility, user guidance, learnability, minimal memory load, as well as perceived usefulness, and perceived ease of use. Authors inferred that perceived usefulness and learnability were key determinants of end-user satisfaction with ERP systems. Zviran et al. (2005) examined, in the ERP context, the relations between user satisfaction and perceived usefulness. Moreover, six user characteristics, namely: functional department to which the user belongs, position in the organizational hierarchy, formal education level, age, computer experience, and gender were investigated for possible differences in user satisfaction and perceived usefulness. The results of these tests enabled authors to conclude that perceived usefulness was one of the factors affecting user satisfaction with an ERP system. Additionally, neither user satisfaction nor perceived usefulness seemed associated with the six user characteristics. Holsapple et al. (2006) investigated user characteristics (age, education level, management level, and computer experience) and ERP tness factors (ERP package localization, compatibility, and task relevance) as determinants of ERP success. ERP user satisfaction was used as a surrogate measure of ERP success through an instrument consisted of three dimensions, namely: project team, product, and knowledge and involvement. Their results indicated that: . compatibility and task relevancy were positively associated with user satisfaction on all three dimensions in the ERP context; . ERP user satisfaction among higher educated users was greater than among lower educated users on the ERP product dimension; and . ERP user satisfaction among management users was greater than among nonmanagement users on the ERP project team dimension. Wu and Wang (2006) developed a reliable and valid instrument for ERP ultimate-user satisfaction measurement. Their instrument identied three factors for the measurement of ERP ultimate-user satisfaction, namely: ERP project team and service, ERP product, and user knowledge and involvement. These factors were perceived as mutually reinforcing elements of ERP ultimate-user satisfaction. Wu and Wang (2007) constructed an instrument for ERP key-user satisfaction measurement analogous to that developed previously (Wu and Wang, 2006) for ERP ultimate-user satisfaction measurement. Their instrument identied three factors for the measurement of ERP key-user satisfaction, namely: ERP product, knowledge and involvement, and contractor service. These factors did not operate in isolation and their contribution to key-user satisfaction was assessed as an entity. 3. Research methodology 3.1 Research method A case study strategy was chosen as the most appropriate research method for this study. Case study strategy is particularly well-suited to IS research because new technologies are continuously introduced and the interest has shifted to organizational rather than technical issues (Benbasat et al., 1987). Case study research has been suggested as an effective method in testing theory within IS research (Lee, 1989) and

ERP user satisfaction issues 631

IMDS 109,5

632

combination of qualitative and quantitative approaches, such as interviews and questionnaires, has been proved especially valuable in assisting IS researchers to avoid potential analytical errors and omissions (Kaplan and Duchon, 1988). Moreover, single organization and single technology studies are common in IS research (Amoako-Gyampah, 2004). Greek public energy organization was selected as our research company because it had some unique attributes. First, it was a large enough organization, in comparison to other Greek companies, with various departments and users who utilize different modules of the ERP system. This fact enabled the collection of quantitative data through questionnaires. Second, before and after the introduction of the ERP system a lot of other, specic purposed and non-integrated, IS were used by users. Thus, they had adequate experience and knowledge to express their satisfaction attitudes and to evaluate ERP systems success. Finally, the time frame between ERPs full implementation and this study was ideal for users to form opinions about ERP by making comparisons with IS not any long used. 3.2 Organizations background and ERP project Greek public energy organization S.A. is the largest industrial company in Greece, in terms of total revenues, assets and number of employees. It was founded in 1950 by the Greek state, which now holds approximately 51 percent of the share capital. Its main business is production and distribution of electric power. The scal year of 2007 organizations revenues run into e5.15 billion, a gure that was equal to 2.4 percent of the countrys GDP. It has presence in all the territories of Greece and serves 7.4 million customers with its 24,602 employees. In 1996 the company was facing a major change in its direct operational environment. The European Commission had voted an act for the deregulation of energy industries in all its member countries with a deadline effect in 2001. According to this act the organization was obliged to break into four core business units, namely: mines, production, transfer, and distribution. In order to manage this change and continue operating effectively the company decided to acquire and implement an ERP system. The organization was condent that this system would integrate the four core business units. A Greek software development company was contracted to design the ERP software based on the organizations needs. The Oracle e-business suite was used and the nal ERP system consisted of eight subsystems: human resources management system, general ledger, xed assets, accounts payable, project costing, purchasing, inventory, order management and bill of material. The total cost of the project including technical support contracts, users licenses, infrastructure and hardware was approximately equal to e12 million. During the pre-implementation period two committees were managing the project. The rst committee had potential ERP users and technical staff from the software development company while the second committee had technical staff from both the software development company and the organization. After 2001 the ERP system was fully operated within the organization with information technology (IT) departments monitoring. 3.3 Research model and hypotheses This study is based upon two research dimensions. The rst dimension measures ERP users satisfaction using 19 satisfaction measure items that were extracted from

literature review, as this was presented in the previous paragraphs. The second dimension examined the existence of deviation in satisfaction levels among ERP users with ve different characteristics, namely: department of employment, gender, age, education, and IT experience. More specically the hypotheses under investigation were: H1. ERP users among different departments have different levels of satisfaction with the ERP system. Each department in an organization has its unique processes to implement and its specic targets to realize. ERP users employed in different departments use different functional modules and interact with different interfaces of the main ERP system. Previous studies have found differences in satisfaction among users from different groups (Zviran, 1992; Sengupta and Zviran, 1997), while others have not (Zviran et al., 2005): H2. Male ERP users in contrast to female ERP users have different levels of satisfaction with the ERP system. At one extreme, Igbaria (1993) and Palvia and Palvia (1999) found satisfaction differences between men and women users. At the other extreme, Zviran et al. (2005) found no differences: H3. ERP users with different age have different levels of satisfaction with the ERP system. Younger employees are more familiar with IT because it was introduced to them earlier, it had a more user friendly format, and access to it was more costless. Younger ERP users tend to be more satised with ERP systems. Palvia and Palvia (1999) supported the existence of satisfaction differences among users with different age. Contrary, Zviran et al. (2005) and Holsapple et al. (2006) opposed the above argument: H4. ERP users with different level of educational background have different levels of satisfaction with the ERP system. More educated users have a better relation with IT than less educated users. Access to advanced knowledge requires IT innovations such as internet and education software applications to be the users every day routine. Holsapple et al. (2006) found some satisfaction differences among users with different educational background. On the other hand, Palvia and Palvia (1999) and Zviran et al. (2005) reported satisfaction homogeneity among differently educated users: H5. ERP users with different work experience in the use of IT have different levels of satisfaction with the ERP system. When a user has a long experience in tasks involving IT is able to handle ERP in a more effective manner by taking, for example, initiatives to solve various problems related to ERP operation. However, previous studies by Zviran et al. (2005) and Holsapple et al. (2006) reported no correlation between IT experience and user satisfaction. The research model along with the hypotheses is shown in Figure 1.

ERP user satisfaction issues 633

IMDS 109,5

ERP user profile Department Gender H1 H2 1 6 11 Education H4 16 17 19 18 H5 ERP user satisfaction 2 7 12 3 8 13 4 9 14 5 10 15

634
Age H3

Figure 1. Research model and hypotheses

IT experience

3.4 Data collection The data for this study were collected through a personal interview with the companys chief information ofcer and through a structured questionnaire directed to ERP users. The questionnaire had three parts as shown in the Appendix, Table AI. The rst part included demographic information, the second part contained 19 scale questions based on previous empirical studies in the eld of IS user satisfaction measurement (Bailey and Pearson, 1983; Ives et al., 1983; Doll and Torkzadeh, 1988; Calisir and Calisir, 2004; Zviran et al., 2005; Wu and Wang, 2006), and the last part involved questions about overall satisfaction with the ERP system. The survey was carried out in North Greece region which is one of the organizations ve administrative areas. This area was selected based on its leading position, among the other areas, in the geographic coverage of its branches and in the number of customers served. The following process was employed and resulted in completed questionnaires from all ERP users of the selected sample. First, a permission to conduct the survey was acquired. Next, in each of the 18 branches of North Greece region a telephone contact was held with one ERP user explaining him/her the purpose of the research and receiving his/her assertion to help reach ERP users of his area. This person was acting as a link since he/she was responsible to receive the questionnaires, to distribute them to ERP users of his area and nally to gather them and to mail them back. The survey took place during the second semester of 2007. 3.5 Assessment of instruments reliability and validity The goodness of measure is mainly evaluated in terms of reliability and validity. Reliability is concerned with stability and consistency in measurement, while validity is concerned with whether the right concept is measured (Forza, 2002). Reliability is operetionalized as internal consistency, which is the degree of inter-correlation, equivalence, and homogeneity among the items which comprise a scale (Nunnally, 1978). The most popular test within the internal consistency method is the (Cronbach 1984) a coefcient. The 19-item instrument had a Cronbach a coefcient of 0.873 conrming its high reliability (Nunnally, 1978). When an instrument is intended to perform a prediction function, validity depends entirely on how well the instrument correlates with

what it is intended to predict (a criterion) (Nunnally, 1978, p. 111). Criterion-related validity is a measure of how well satisfaction measure-items are related to measures of ERP user satisfaction. Hence, in order to test criterion-related validity Pearson correlation, between the sum scores of all items in the instrument and the measures of two valid criterions, was estimated (Wu and Wang, 2006). The Pearson correlation between the sum of 19 items and overall satisfaction item was 0.691, while between the sum of 19 items and ERP success item was 0.671. Both indexes were signicant at the 99 percent condence interval assuring adequate criterion-related validity. 3.6 Data analysis approaches Exploratory factor analysis was employed in order to reduce the initial number of 19 satisfaction measure-items and to identify a smaller set of factors, which represent the relationships among these items parsimoniously. Principal component analysis, with eigenvalues greater than one, was used to extract factors, and varimax with Kaiser normalization as the orthogonal rotation method. The Bartlett Test of Sphericity and the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) measure of the sampling adequacy were used to validate the use of factor analysis. Elimination of items conducted when an item had either loadings less than 0.35 on all factors or loadings greater than 0.35 on more than one factor. The rst run of factor analysis eliminated seven items that did not fulll the previous criteria. The second run on the remaining 12 items eliminate another three items. The nal run on the remaining nine items yielded a stable set of three factors. The regression method was employed for estimating factor score coefcients. The reliability of the extracted factors was assessed using (Cronbach, 1984) a coefcient. The titles of the factors were given based on the descriptive approach reecting the nature of the items that belong to them (Kim and Mueller, 1978). The simultaneous multiple regression analysis was employed in order to evaluate the power of these factors in predicting ERP user satisfaction. Finally, the ve hypotheses were examined through parametric and non-parametric statistical inference tests. In particular, Table I presents the test employed for each hypothesis. The data were analyzed with the statistical software SPSSw version 16.0. 4. Results 4.1 Respondents prole The demographics of ERP users are presented in Table II. Almost two thirds of the users were employed in the network department something that is reasonable due to organizations heavy industrial nature. Their age approximated the normal distribution with users from 31 to 50 years representing 80 percent of the sample. Users gender was balanced between men and women and also almost 90 percent
Statistical test Parametric Nonparametric ANOVA t-test ANOVA t-test t-test Kruskal-Wallis Mann-Whitney Kruskal-Wallis Mann-Whitney Mann-Whitney

ERP user satisfaction issues 635

Hypothesis Department Gender Agea Education IT experience

Subcategories Network, sales, supportive Male, female 21-30, 31-40, 41-50, over 50 Non university degree, undergraduate degree Yes, no

Note: aCounted in years

Table I. Statistical inference tests utilized for hypotheses examination

IMDS 109,5

User characteristic Department Network Sales Supportive Age 21-30 years 31-40 years 41-50 years Over 50 years Gender Male Female Education Non university degree Undergraduate degree IT experience Yes No Note: n 68

Frequency 41 10 17 2 22 32 12 35 33 49 19 61 7

% 60.3 14.7 25.0 2.9 32.4 47.1 17.6 51.5 48.5 72.1 27.9 89.7 10.3

636

Table II. Demographic information of ERP users

of them had IT experience before ERP implementation. Users with non university degree were the majority while users with university degree were the minority. 4.2 Exploratory factor analysis The results of exploratory factor analysis are summarized in Table III. The Bartletts test of sphericity was large and the associate signicance level was zero and therefore the correlation matrix was an identity. The KMO measure of sampling adequacy was middling (< 0.70) suggesting that factor analysis was appropriate for these data sets (Kaiser, 1974). Factor loadings were higher than 0.65 indicating their being conceptualized as pertaining to the same construct (Leech et al., 2005). Moreover, the extracted factors had a values over 0.70 conrming their high reliability (Nunnally, 1978). The initial set of 19 satisfaction measure items was reduced to three underlying factors. The rst factor, Interaction with IT Department accounted for 24.95 percent of the variance in the data and contained three measure items related to the collaboration between the user and the staff of IT department. The second factor Pre-implementation processes accounted for 24.87 percent of the variance in the data and included two measure items regarding support and adequate time provided to the user before the full implementation of the ERP system. The third factor ERP product and adaptability accounted for 15.51 percent and comprised of the variance. These thee factors together accounted for 65.33 percent of the total variance in the data. 4.3 Simultaneous multiple regression analysis In order to determine whether the three extracted factors were signicant predictors of ERP users satisfaction the simultaneous multiple regression method was employed. Dependent variable was ERP user satisfaction score and predictors were factor scores coefcients estimated with the regression method. The results are summarized in Table IV.

Variance Cronbachs a Loadings Eigenvalue explained coefcient Factor 1: interaction with IT department 1. Your cooperation with IT department regarding ERP issues is satisfactory 2. Your communication with IT department enables you to solve immediately problems regarding ERP 3. IT department has sufcient knowledge of ERP Factor 2: pre-implementation processes 5. The quantity and quality of seminars and supportive training that you attend before ERP full implementation has help you to improve the use of ERP 7. The elapsed time between trial operation and full operation of ERP was acceptable Factor 3: ERP product and adaptability 14. ERP is stable, concerning his continual operation, and available on demand 17. You use all the available functions of ERP 18. ERP is easily adapted to changes occurred in your job 19. ERP is able to communicate with other IS of the organization Total variance explained KMO Bartlett test of sphericity Approx. x 2 Sig. 2.25 0.849 24.95% 0.834

ERP user satisfaction issues 637

0.854 0.806 2.24 24.87% 0.750

0.836 0.706 1.40 0.808 0.675 0.798 0.671 65.33% 0.689 152.614 0.000 Table III. Results of factor analysis on satisfaction measure items 15.51% 0.760

Variables Independent Predictor Satisfaction Interaction with IT department Pre-implementation processes ERP product and adaptability

Predictor statistics b-coefcient t-statistic 0.330 0.170 0.595 3.706 * * 1.904 * 6.670 * *

Model statistics R2 F-statistic 0.491 20.616 * * Table IV. Results of multiple regression analysis

Notes: *p , 0.1; * *p , 0.01

Based on F-statistic test, the linear combination of Interaction with IT department, Pre-implementation processes, and ERP product and adaptability signicantly predicted ERP user satisfaction. The beta weights suggested that each factor had a statistically signicant predictive power, with ERP product and adaptability contributed most in predicting ERP user satisfaction. The R 2 value indicated that 49 percent of the variance in satisfaction was explained by the model and according to Cohen (1988), this is a large effect.

IMDS 109,5

638

4.4 Statistical inference tests for hypotheses testing The ve hypotheses testing results are shown in Table V. Based on the statistics of each test only H1 is supported. In specic there is a statistically signicant difference in satisfaction levels among the three departments users. Users from network department are less satised than users from the two departments, namely: sales and supportive. On the contrary the study proved that there no signicant differences between users with different gender (H2), age (H3), education (H4), and IT experience (H5). 5. Discussion of the results Findings from this study indicate that three factors constitute the level of ERP users satisfaction. These factors are Interaction with IT department, Pre-implementation processes, and ERP product and adaptability. Furthermore, these results are consistent with the ndings from previous studies (Somers et al., 2003; Calisir and Calisir, 2004; Zviran et al., 2005; Holsapple et al., 2006; Wu and Wang, 2006, 2007) showing that more than one factors constitute and signicantly affect ERP users satisfaction. Interaction with IT department is the factor which explains most of variance in ERP users satisfaction. In most organizations IT department is responsible for the effective operation of the ERP system. It must be staffed with employees that have deep knowledge of the ERP system in order to solve every problem faced by the user and to enable users to understand the potential benets gained through the use of ERP system. When a user is condent that every problem that he faces or might face has a lot of changes to be solved, by IT department staff, is more satised with ERP system and he use it more intensively. This fact is more important when ERP comes to substitute other old IS, usually referred to as legacy systems, with which users were familiar to and loyal with. Support, commitment, authority, and direction from top management are necessary in ensuring overall success with the ERP system (Inedo, 2008). IT department should exhibit an extroversive behavior by motivating ERP users to communicate with its staff, to receive users opinions for improving both the process of data entry and the data output. Some initiations in this direction are: . a continuously available phone call technical support service where users could request instructions, guidance, and solutions from IT department staff, regarding all issues related to ERP users job;
Statistical test Hypothesis Department Gender Age Education IT experience Parametric t-test ANOVA t-statistic F-statistic 2 1.607 1.216 2 0.253 4.877 * 0.408 Nonparametric Mann-Whitney Kruskal-Wallis U-statistic K-statistic 493 381 193 9.941 * 1.886

Table V. Results of statistical inference tests

Notes: *p , 0.01; the mean satisfaction score of ERP users from network department was 4.56, from supportive department was 5.35, and from sales department was 5.40

an online forum administrated by IT department with restricted access only to ERP users where they can post their comments about ERP system, discuss their problems, and share their best practices; and a newsletter service from IT department informing ERP users for all advances occurred and innovations intending to be incorporated in the ERP system.

ERP user satisfaction issues 639

Pre-implementation processes is the second factor which contributes substantially in ERP users satisfaction. During pre-implementation phase operational needs, business drivers, strategic plans, and other factors that dene the scope and objective of the ERP system, are identied (Marnewick and Labuschagne, 2005). ERP users should have a leading role in this phase because they are the ones that will use this system more than anyone else in the organization and also they will be the basic receivers of ERP service. When users are involved in IS development, they tend to be more satised with the system. In fact, adequacy of training provided to users is the most semantic form of user involvement (Amoako-Gyampah and White, 1993). Training should include information about their new roles and responsibilities, the business objectives of the new system and the projected benet to the company (Marnewick and Labuschagne, 2005). If training does not cover why each task is important and how every transaction is part of a larger process, then the users are less likely to use the system correctly or consistently (Fister Gale, 2002). This training strategy, where users understand the importance of their job in realizing company objectives, increases commitment to their work and satisfaction with the ERP system. Having capable and innovative users who are well-educated, experienced, responsible, and knowledgeable will have a positive effect on the adoption of an ERP system, as these users will not resist using the system at rst sight (Basoglou et al., 2007). Organizations should provide a customized training and education program that provides users with tools and practical experience needed to integrate new processes, roles and responsibilities (Ngai et al., 2008). Some initiations in this direction are: . customized training courses based on individual users needs, skills and competencies; . recognition and rewarding of users participation in training processes; and . innovative e-learning techniques like computer-based training, web-based virtual classrooms, and DVD training applications enabling users to receive training on demand. ERP product and adaptability is the third factor determining ERP users satisfaction. The ERP system fulls ERP users expectations and further contributes to their satisfaction when it operates continuously without interruptions and delays, provides accurate, and precise information through a user friendly format and a convenient interface, adopts easily changes related to processes and policies, and communicates with other IS. In a liquid business environment where changes occur very rapidly the issue of adaptability is a main concern. Changes in direct and indirect taxes, changes in depreciation rates and methods, changes in exchange rates, adoption of International Financial Reporting Standards, and a number of other industry and country specic changes should be easily adopted in the system. A last issue that emerges from the analysis is the different level of satisfaction among ERP users from different departments. In specic, ERP users from network

IMDS 109,5

640

department, which is the technical department of the organization, are less satised than ERP users from the other two departments, namely: sales and supportive. The quality of information that users receive is an explanation for this difference. Users from sales and supportive departments interact with customers and need precise and useful information to respond immediately to customers requests whether these are for a new service contract or for a poor service complaint. For them ERP is the main assisting tool for their job. On the other hand, users from network department are not depended so much on ERP information. Their main job is to design and control the network and this is done with specialized engineering systems such as AutoCAD. Moreover, this difference could also be attributed to a departments micro culture where a leader may strongly motivate and inspire ERP users. Job rotation is the most appropriate human resource strategy in order to share this culture and the related best practices within all departments. 6. Conclusion, limitations, and further directions ERP systems are dynamic IS that continuously integrate information into a main database from different departments, at different sites, in different ways. However, these systems are very expensive and require major organizational changes. Companies that aim to gain a respectable return from this huge capital investment should consider all factors that may have a direct effect on these systems success and therefore minimize the risks associated with this particular investment. ERP users satisfaction is a surrogate measure of ERP success (Wu and Wang, 2006), and as such its extensive investigation is necessary. This case study provides insights for enterprises and managers who run ERP projects or intent to acquire an ERP system, about the major factors determining ERP users satisfaction and consequently contributing to an ERP systems success. Effective management of these three factors, namely: Interaction with IT department, Pre-implementation processes, and ERP product and adaptability, will assist companies to avoid implementation pitfalls and gain the potential benets of ERP systems operation. More specic, from a managerial standpoint, the results of this study can inform managers about the multidimensional feature of ERP users satisfaction and assist them to develop appropriate intervention practices and processes aiming to increase their users satisfaction during and after the implementation process. Managers may choose to follow the human resource strategies presented in this paper. Additionally, managers could periodically evaluate the three aforementioned satisfaction factors, benchmark the results with the expected satisfaction levels and diagnose which factors are problematic and need further consideration. As with any study, this research has a potential limitation. Since the research was conducted in one organization, with a unique organizational culture and some special characteristics, the results might not hold true in other organizations and environments. A similar study examining the same subject in a broad and diverse sample of Greek companies could serve to further extend and enhance these ndings in the Greek industry. Also, longitudinal data gathered after a satisfactory time frame from the same company, by surveying the same respondents, will reveal whether satisfaction level has changed and which factors, if any, contributed to this change. Furthermore, it would be interesting to explore, through an empirical research, possible differences in

ERP user satisfaction among companies with different organizational proles such as industry type, annual turnover, and annual IT investment or among companies with different ERP project characteristics such us, ERP system vendor, existence of ERP evaluation metrics, and successful ERP implementation. Finally, an analogous multi-country survey will enable to assess the inuence of cultural factors on ERP user satisfaction.
References Abdinnour-Helm, S., Lengnick-Hall, M.L. and Lengnick-Hall, C.A. (2003), Pre-implementation attitudes and organizational readiness for implementing an enterprise resource planning system, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 146 No. 2, pp. 258-73. Allen, J.J. (2000), Information systems as technology innovation, Information Technology & People, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 210-21. Al-Mashari, M. and Al-Mudimigh, A. (2003), ERP implementation: lessons from a case study, Information Technology & People, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 21-33. Amoako-Gyampah, K. (2004), ERP implementation factors: a comparison of managerial and end-user perspectives, Business Process Management Journal, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 171-83. Amoako-Gyampah, K. (2007), Perceived usefulness, user involvement and behavioral intention: an empirical study of ERP implementation, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 1232-48. Amoako-Gyampah, K. and White, K.B. (1993), User involvement and user satisfaction: an exploratory contingency model, Information and Management, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 1-10. Bailey, J.E. and Pearson, S.W. (1983), Development of a tool for measuring and analyzing computer user satisfaction, Management Science, Vol. 29 No. 5, pp. 530-45. Basoglou, N., Daim, T. and Kerimoglu, O. (2007), Organizational adoption of enterprise resource planning systems: a conceptual framework, Journal of High Technology Management Research, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 73-97. Benbasat, I., Goldstein, D.K. and Mead, M. (1987), The case research strategy in studies of information systems, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 369-86. Calisir, F. and Calisir, F. (2004), The relation of interface usability characteristics, perceived usefulness, and perceived ease of use to end user satisfaction with enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 505-15. Chang, M.-K., Cheung, W., Cheng, C.-H. and Yeung, J.H.Y. (2008), Understanding ERP system adoption from the users perspective, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 113 No. 2, pp. 928-42. Cohen, J. (1988), Statistical Power and Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ. Cronbach, L.J. (1984), Essentials of Psychological Testing, 4th ed., Harper & Row, New York, NY. Davenport, T.H. (1998), Putting the enterprise into the enterprise system, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 76 No. 4, pp. 121-31. Davenport, T.H., Harris, J.G. and Cantrell, S. (2004), Enterprise systems and ongoing process change, Business Process Management Journal, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 16-26. DeLone, W.H. and McLean, E.R. (1992), Information systems success: the quest for the dependent variable, Information Systems Research, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 60-95.

ERP user satisfaction issues 641

IMDS 109,5

642

Doll, W.J. and Torkzadeh, G. (1988), The measurement of end-user computing satisfaction, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 259-74. Ehie, I.C. and Madsen, M. (2005), Identifying critical issues in enterprise resource planning (ERP) implementation, Computers in Industry, Vol. 56 No. 6, pp. 545-57. Fister Gale, S. (2002), For ERP success, plan on a culture change, Workforce, pp. 88-94, available at: www.workforce.com/archive/feature/23/32/35/index.php (accessed October 3, 2008). Forza, C. (2002), Survey research in operations management: a process-based perspective, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 152-94. Franke, J. (2007), ERP market strong through 2011, SaaS products gain share, available at: http://searchsap.techtarget.com/news/article/0,289142,sid21_gci1264010,00.html (accessed August 13, 2008). Gurbaxani, V. and Whang, S. (1991), The impact of information systems on organizations and markets, Communications of the ACM, Vol. 34 No. 1, pp. 59-73. Hendricks, K.B., Singhal, V.R. and Stratman, J.L. (2007), The impact of enterprise systems on corporate performance: a study of ERP, SCM, CRM system implementations, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 65-82. Holsapple, C.W., Wang, Y.-M. and Wu, J.-H. (2006), Empirically testing user characteristics and tness factors in enterprise resource planning success, International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 323-42. Inedo, P. (2007), An empirical study of ERP success evaluations by business and IT managers, Information Management & Computer Security, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 270-82. Inedo, P. (2008), Impacts of business vision, top management support, and external expertise on ERP success, Business Process Management Journal, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 551-68. Igbaria, M. (1993), User acceptance of microcomputer technology: an empirical test, Omega, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 73-90. Ives, B., Olson, M.H. and Baroudi, J.J. (1983), The measurement of user information satisfaction, Communications of the ACM, Vol. 26 No. 10, pp. 785-93. Kaiser, H. (1974), An index of factorial simplicity, Psychometrika, Vol. 39 No. 1, pp. 31-6. Kaplan, B. and Duchon, D. (1988), Combining quantitative and qualitative methods in information systems research: a case study, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 571-86. Kayas, O.G., McLean, R., Hines, T. and Wright, G.H. (2008), The panoptic gaze: analysing the interaction between enterprise resource planning technology and organisational culture, International Journal of Information Management, Vol. 28 No. 6, pp. 446-52. Kim, J. and Mueller, C.W. (1978), Factor Analysis: Statistical Methods and Practical Issues, Sage, Beverly Hills, CA. Kim, Y., Lee, Z. and Gosain, S. (2005), Impediments to successful ERP implementation process, Business Process Management Journal, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 158-70. Klaus, H., Rosemann, M. and Gable, G.G. (2000), What is ERP?, Information Systems Frontiers, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 141-62. Lee, A.S. (1989), A scientic methodology for MIS case studies, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 33-50. Leech, N.L., Barrett, K.C. and Morgan, G.A. (2005), SPSS for Intermediate Statistics: Use and Interpretation, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, London. McAfee, A. (2002), The impact of enterprise information technology adoption on operational performance: an empirical investigation, Production and Operations Management, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 33-53.

McFarlan, F.W. (1984), Information technology changes the way you compete, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 62 No. 3, pp. 98-103. Marnewick, C. and Labuschagne, L. (2005), A conceptual model for enterprise resource planning (ERP), Information Management & Computer Security, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 144-55. Meng, Z. and Lee, S.-Y.T. (2007), The value of IT to rms in a developing country in the catch-up process: an empirical comparison of China and the United States, Decision Support Systems, Vol. 43 No. 3, pp. 737-45. Mukherji, A. (2002), The evolution of information systems: their impact on organizations and structures, Management Decision, Vol. 40 No. 5, pp. 497-507. Ngai, E.W.T., Law, C.C.H. and Wat, F.K.T. (2008), Examining the critical success factors in the adoption of enterprise resource planning, Computers in Industry, Vol. 59 No. 6, pp. 548-64. Nunnally, J.C. (1978), Psychometric Theory, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY. Palvia, P.C. and Palvia, S.C. (1999), An examination of IT satisfaction of small-business users, Information & Management, Vol. 35 No. 3, pp. 127-37. Porter, M.E. and Millar, V.E. (1985), How information gives you competitive advantage, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 63 No. 4, pp. 149-60. Powers, R.F. and Dickson, G.W. (1973), MIS project management: myths, opinions, and reality, California Management Review, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 147-56. Sengupta, K. and Zviran, M. (1997), Measuring user satisfaction in an outsourcing environment, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, Vol. 44 No. 4, pp. 414-21. Shang, S. and Seddon, B.P. (2002), Assessing and managing the benets of enterprise systems: the business managers perspective, Information Systems Journal, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 271-99. Skok, W. and Legge, M. (2002), Evaluating enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems using an interpretive approach, Knowledge and Process Management, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 72-80. Somers, T.M., Nelson, K. and Karimi, J. (2003), Conrmatory factor analysis of the end-user computing satisfaction instrument: replication within an ERP domain, Decision Sciences, Vol. 34 No. 3, pp. 595-621. Stefanou, C.J. (2001), A framework for the ex-ante evaluation of ERP software, European Journal of Information Systems, Vol. 10 No. 4, pp. 204-15. Velcu, O. (2007), Exploring the effects of ERP systems on organizational performance: evidence from Finnish companies, Industrial Management & Data Systems, Vol. 107 No. 9, pp. 1316-34. Violino, B. (2008), ERP: a morphing market, available at: www.cioinsight.com/c/a/Technology/ ERP-Morphing-Market (accessed August 16, 2008). Woodie, A. (2005), ERP market grew solidly in 2004, AMR research says, IT Jungle, Vol. 4 No. 25, available at: www.itjungle.com/tfh/tfh062005-story03.html (accessed August 13, 2008). Wu, J.-H. and Wang, Y.-M. (2006), Measuring ERP success: the ultimate users view, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 26 No. 8, pp. 882-903. Wu, J.-H. and Wang, Y.-M. (2007), Measuring ERP success: the key-users viewpoint of the ERP to produce a viable IS in the organization, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 1582-96. Zmud, R.W. (1978), An empirical investigation of the dimensionality of the concept of information, Decision Sciences, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 187-95. Zmud, R.W. (1979), Individual differences and MIS success: a review of the empirical literature, Management Science, Vol. 25 No. 10, pp. 966-79.

ERP user satisfaction issues 643

IMDS 109,5

Zviran, M. (1992), Evaluating user satisfaction in a hospital environment: an exploratory study, Health Care Management Review, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 51-62. Zviran, M., Pliskin, N. and Levin, R. (2005), Measuring user satisfaction and perceived usefulness in the ERP context, Journal of Computer Information Systems, Vol. 45 No. 3, pp. 43-52. Further reading Cronbach, L.J. (1951), Coefcient alpha and the internal structure of tests, Psychometrika, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 297-334. Franz, C.R. and Robey, F. (1986), Organizational context, user involvement, and the usefulness of information systems, Decision Sciences, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 329-56. Motwani, J., Subramanian, R. and Gopalakrishna, P. (2005), Critical factors for successful ERP implementation: exploratory ndings from four case studies, Computers in Industry, Vol. 56 No. 6, pp. 529-44. Murphy, K.E. and Simon, S.J. (2002), Intangible benets valuation in ERP projects, Information Systems Journal, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 301-20.

644

Appendix

Part A Work experience ERP experience Gender Department Age A Up to 5 years A 1 year A Male A Up to 21 A Network A 2 years A 6-10 years A Female A 21-30 years A Sales A 3 years A 11-20 years Education A Supportive A 31-40 years A 4 years A 21-30 years A Non university degree IT experience A 41-50 years A Over 30 years A Over 4 years A Over 50 years A Undergraduate degree A Yes A Graduate Degree (MSc, PhD) A No Part B (1, absolute disagreement; 2, strong disagreement; 3, disagreement, 4, neutral; 5, agreement; 6, strong agreement; 7, absolute agreement) 1. Your cooperation with IT department regarding ERP issues is satisfactory 2. Your communication with IT department enables you to solve immediately problems regarding ERP 3. IT department has sufcient knowledge of ERP 4. IT department has every intention of helping you with ERP problems 5. The quantity and quality of seminars and supportive training that you attend before ERP full implementation has help you improve the use of ERP 6. The operation instructions and user manual is understood and does not require specialized knowledge 7. The elapsed time between trial operation and full operation of ERP was acceptable 8. Information provided by ERP is accurate and reliable without any further verication 9. Information provided by ERP is available in a satisfactory time in order to use it in your job 10. The elapsed time between your request for ERP service and the reply from the ERP is satisfactory 11. The quantity of data provided by ERP is sufcient and useful for your job 12. The layout of ERP output both in screen and in hard copy is satisfactory 13. The functions of ERP are related to your job 14. ERP is stable, concerning his continual operation, and available on demand 15. ERP is easy to use it in your job 16. ERP is useful and valuable for your job 17. You use all the available functions of ERP 18. ERP is easily adapted to changes occurred in your job 19. ERP is able to communicate with other IS of the organization Part C 1. Are you satised with the use of ERP in your job? (Likert seven-point) 2. Are you considering ERP as a successful information system? (Likert seven-point)

ERP user satisfaction issues 645

Table AI. The questionnaire provided to ERP users

Corresponding author Katerina Gotzamani can be contacted at: kgotza@uom.gr

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints