Establishing an evidence-based 9D evaluation approach for ERP post-implementation

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to propose a systematic and customisable framework, titled the 9D approach, aiming to evaluate the enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems as well as to identify potential socio-technical problems, misfits and deficiencies that can cause ERP failure during the system post-implementation phase. Design/methodology/approach The proposed 9D ERP evaluation framework includes nine dimensions and 85 evaluation criteria. This theoretical framework is then used in a six-step evaluation process based on a mixed-methods design. A case study involving a large-size private company in China was used as an exemplification to illustrate how the proposed 9D approach can be applied in practices. Findings The findings of the study clearly demonstrated that after the ERP “go-live” point, companies still experience many challenges and problems in the post-implementation phase. These problems can be located in very diverse organisational, systemic and personnel aspects of the company, as well as across different functional areas and organisational levels. The proposed 9D approach was demonstrated to be an efficient and systematic tool to investigate and explore such ERP problems in an in-depth level within the organisational context. Research limitations/implications This study contributes to the theory of IS evaluation in general, and provides valuable insights into the ERP post-implementation evaluation in particular. Practical implications The proposed ERP evaluation approach forms a sound base for continuous ERP improvement and contributes to sustain seamless alignment between ERP and its organisational context. The customisable feature of the framework offers flexibility and enables its use by companies of all sizes, any sector, and any country. Originality/value To the best of the researchers’ knowledge, this is the most extensive and comprehensive framework for the post-evaluation of ERPs proposed hitherto. The need for this new framework was grounded on the argumentation of the drawbacks of existing ERP measurement and evaluation studies that simply focus on success rather than the more critical failure factors.