Characteristics of the Multiple Attribute Decision Making Methodology in Enterprise Resource Planning Software Decisions
Communications of the IIMA, Vol: 5, Issue: 1
2015
- 1Citations
- 1,925Usage
- 32Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations1
- Citation Indexes1
- CrossRef1
- Usage1,925
- Downloads1,137
- 1,137
- Abstract Views788
- Captures32
- Readers32
- 32
Article Description
Realising information technology (IT) decisions and implementations are consistently seen as major challenges of business management faced with increasingly complex IT environments. This article seeks to increase the awareness of the multiple attributive decision making methodology (MADM) in the context of enterprise resource planning (ERP) projects and provides empirical insights based on 209 datasets originating from a primary, national and industry independent survey. The given MADM topics comprise strategic alignment, attributes with associated importance weightings, considered and chosen systems, methodical utilisation, follow-up controlling, andfinally MADM relevance in terms of a possible connection between MADM and ERP success. The results in particular show that while the ERP decision problem seems to be structured based on the MADM principle, the minority of decision makers rely on a formal MADM method. The empirically tested measurement model indicates that success according to expectations was achieved at a greater level of magnitude in firms supported by a formal MADM method, especially in terms offinancial firm level impact and service quality.
Bibliographic Details
John M. Pfau Library, California State University San Bernardino
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know