A decision model for strategic evaluation of enterprise information technologies

Information Systems Management

Volumn 18, Issue 3, 2001, Pages 62-72

  Sarkis, Joseph ^a   Sundarraj, R P ^b  

^a CLARK UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b CLARK UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

INFORMATION SYSTEMS;

ANALYTICAL HIERARCHY PROCESS; DECISION MODELING; ENTERPRISE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGIES; FINANCIAL MODELS; ORGANIZATIONAL GOALS; QUANTITATIVE TECHNIQUES; STRATEGIC EVALUATION; STRATEGIC SYSTEMS;

HARDWARE;

EID: 0035354414     PISSN: 10580530     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1201/1078/43196.18.3.20010601/31292.9     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. 17 Conventional ERP products do not provide a sophisticated level of support for these advanced functions
2. Bingi, P., Sharma, M. K., and Godla, J. K., 1999. Critical Issues Affecting an ERP Implementation. Information Systems Management, 16 (3):7–14.
3. Laughlin, S. P., 1999. An ERP Game Plan. Journal of Business Strategy, Jan.-Feb.:32
4. Trunick, P. A., 1999. ERP:Promises or Pipe Dreams. Transportation and Distribution, 40 (1):23
5. Bartholomew, D., Jesitus, J., and Kreitzberg, C. B., 1997. Managing the Internetworked Corporation:Promises Versus Reality. Industry Week, 246 (20):26–36.
6. Anonymous. 1999. ERP Averages. Computerworld, April 5:6
7. IT Pro. 1999. Return on ERP Investment Takes Time, Cyber IT Professional, IEEE Computer Society. Available:http://computer.org/itpro/it1999/html/f3007.htm
8. Holland, C., and Light, B., 1999. A Critical Success Factors Model for ERP Implementation. IEEE Software, 16 (3):30–36.
9. Adler, P. S., 1989. “ Technology Strategy:a Guide to the Literature ”. In Research in Technological Innovation, Management and Policy, 25–151. Greenwich, CT:JAI Press.
10. Prahalad, C. K., and Hamel, G., 1990. The core competence of the corporation. Harvard Business Review, 90 (3) May-June:79–91.
11. Hammer, M., and Champy, J. A., 1993. Reengineering the Corporation:A Manifesto for Business Revolution, New York:Harper Business Press.
12. Saaty, T. L., 1980. The Analytic Hierarchy Process:Planning, Priority Setting, Resource Allocation, New York:McGraw Hill.
13. Albayrakoglu, M., 1996. Justification of New Manufacturing Technology:A Strategic Approach Using the Analytical Hierarchy Process. Production and Inventory Management Journal, 37 (1):71–77.
14. Sarkis, J., and Sundarraj, R. P., 1999. “ Hub Location at Digital Equipment Corporation:A Comprehensive Analysis of Qualitative and Quantitative Factors ”. In Working Paper, Worcester, MA:Clark University.
15. Hayes, R. H., Wheelwright, S. C., and Clark, K. B., 1988. Dynamic Manufacturing, New York:The Free Press.
16. Skinner, W., 1974. The Focused Factory. Harvard Business Review, 52 (3):113–122.
17. Sarkis, J., and Sundarraj, R. P., 2000. Factors for Strategic Evaluation of Enterprise Information Technologies. International Journal of Purchasing, Distribution and Logistics Management, 30 (3/4):196–220.
18. Bakos, Y., 1998. The Emerging Role of Electronic Marketplaces on the Internet. Communications of the ACM, 41 (8):35–42.
19. Ghosh, A. K., 1998. E-commerce Security, New York:John Wiley & Sons.
20. Miller, G. A., 1956. The Magic Number Seven Plus or Minus Two:Some Limits on Our Capacity for Processing Information. Psychology Review, 63 (3):81–97.
21. Our systematic, objective, yet practicable approach is important because the simple scoring technique given by (1) is in use in several Fortune 100 companies to whom we have talked.
22. Because the AHP technique entails a number of PWCs (see next section), it is better to (up front) prune factors which are considered to be unimportant by the organization's managers.