IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering

PAPER • OPEN ACCESS

A Combined ANP, TOPSIS and MCGP Approach to Select Knowledge

Transfer Strategy: A Case Study in Indonesian SMEs ERP System
Implementation
To cite this article: I Cahyadi 2019 IOP Conf. Ser.: Mater. Sci. Eng. 505 012001

View the article online for updates and enhancements.

This content was downloaded from IP address 132.234.51.168 on 04/12/2019 at 23:52

1st International Conference on Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 505 (2019) 012001 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/505/1/012001

A Combined ANP, TOPSIS and MCGP Approach

to Select Knowledge Transfer Strategy: A Case Study in
Indonesian SMEs ERP System Implementation

I Cahyadi1
1
Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Trunojoyo Madura
Kamal, Madura 69162 Indonesia ([email protected])

Abstract. In order to enhance business sustainability and become more competitive in the
international market, many Indonesian Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) have attempted
to implement Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) System albeit with some problems. This
research draws from the relevant literature of information system success models, knowledge
management and user behaviour, to develop an integrated model to select various factors of
knowledge transfer strategy in ERP implementation within Indonesian SMEs. The research
model includes specific constructs and paths which affect the evaluation of a successful
knowledge transfer strategy. Multiple Criteria Decision Making and Goal Programming were
used to select the most appropriate knowledge transfer strategy in an adopting company. The
study found that knowledge sharing culture depends on absorptive capacity and consulting
companies capability. The study also found that the proposed model can assist Indonesian
SMEs in knowledge transfer strategy selection and decision during their ERP system
implementation project.

1. Introduction
Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) system is a group of computer applications or modules that
integrates and coordinates various business processes both across and within a company [1]. In recent
years, ERP vendors have expanded their market segment to SMEs since almost all of the
large enterprises have already implemented ERP systems and the market has become close-to-
saturation [2].

The SMEs sector in Indonesia is regarded as one of the main drivers of the Indonesian
economy. Reference [3] underlined the significant role of SMEs that form the backbone of world
economies to ensure growth with equity among countries. In this regard, data from BPS survey in 2013
shows that the SME sector in Indonesia constitutes more than 99.98 % of all Indonesian enterprises and
employs 97.2 per cent of the total workforce [4]. With respect to the GDP contribution, Indonesian
SMEs have recently contributed around 57 per cent to Indonesian GDP [5].

For many SMEs, demand for better service by business partners or customers often provide the
impetus for IT implementation. Studies about IT adoption in SMEs reveal that the small firms often
decide to implement IT in order to fulfill their suppliers and customers demands by delivering quality
service and effective communication [6]. The efficiency of ERP system-based communication in
supply chains at large enterprises has motivated SMEs to implement ERP application to develop
supply networks with their business partners [7].

Indonesian SMEs have also begun to implement ERP in their operations, the systems remain under-
utilised in these firms and many are yet to experience the ERP systems' benefits. The studies of ERP
adoption in Indonesian SMEs reveal that the problems in under-utilisation of ERP stem from a
considerable knowledge gap between ERP vendors, consultants and recipient companies [8] [9]. The
critical role of knowledge for ERP success is often mentioned in the broader literature on ERP

Content from this work may be used under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 licence. Any further distribution
of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the title of the work, journal citation and DOI.
Published under licence by IOP Publishing Ltd 1
1st International Conference on Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 505 (2019) 012001 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/505/1/012001

implementation, where authors generally agree that an effective knowledge transfer facilitates
corporate investment to adopt ERP system, in particular, to capture, elevate and retain ERP system
knowledge among their employees [10] [11] [12].

The question of what causes the success or failure of adoption of IS in an organisation has become an
interesting topic for researchers. Research in end user's training for IT implementation projects support
the notion that knowledge transfer plays an essential role for successful IT system implementation [13]
[14]. In the ERP implementation projects, the knowledge transfer process during the projects is
considered as one of the significant support factors for ensuring a successful and beneficial ERP
project [15]. Since ERP systems are expensive, competent external experts are important to increase
the ERP implementation success probability. Many organisations have inadequate IT personnel who
has expertise to carry out ERP system implementation, and often those organisations acquire the
required expertise by hiring consulting companies to guide them through the whole implementation
process [16].

Research data on ERP implementation in Indonesian SMEs shows that 70% of ERP projects
experience delays and spend more costs than what originally estimated [17]. Reference [17] argues that
knowledge management plays an important role in evaluating the sources of knowledge transfer
problems and solving the most important barriers in ERP system projects. ERP success is not merely a
matter of logistic in implementation of the technology, but is determined by the way the organisation is
able to disseminate knowledge about the usage and benefits of IS among its employees. The process of
knowledge transfer involves exchange of knowledge and its application between the knowledge source
and its recipient. According to [18], knowledge transfer occurs when the experience of a person or an
organisational unit influences another person or unit in that organisation which then brings
transformation in the person or recipient unit's knowledge repository and practices.

Interest has then grown in examining how knowledge is acquired and maintained during ERP system
implementation projects but this has not been investigated in depth in the ERP projects of smaller
firms. Moreover, there appears to be little research emphasizing on knowledge transfer process in
Indonesian SMEs’ ERP system implementation projects, challenges that their managers face in
managing the process, and how to address those challenges. To that end, this paper reports on a
quantitative research to examine various factors' contribution that influence the knowledge transfer
strategies selection in Indonesian SMEs’ ERP projects. The proposed model in this paper describes the
problem related to the selection of knowledge transfer strategies in a hierarchical form and integrates
the criteria of knowledge transfer with various knowledge transfer strategy options. It also incorporates
explicit constraints such as tangible and intangible measures of the available strategy choices and
formulate a multiple criteria goal programming model to identify the best knowledge transfer strategy.

2. Literature Review

2.1 Knowledge Transfer Strategies

A vast literature of knowledge management research has examined many range of knowledge transfer
strategies, and attempted to classify them. One strategy classification is system-based strategy which
emphasizes on the capability to make, save, share, and utilize an organization’s documented
knowledge through advanced ITs [19]. Another classification focuses on the belief that tacit knowledge
which existing in peoples’ heads is the most valuable knowledge and should be transferred through
direct contacts and social relationships [20]. This strategy is classified as human-oriented strategy.
Knowledge transfer process using human-oriented strategy is considered time consuming, expensive
and slow. Therefore, tacit knowledge transfer process requires an efficient codification into explicit
media [21].

An organization needs to understand which knowledge transfer strategies better suited to their
circumstances. Some authors suggest a combination of knowledge transfer strategies while
others argue that knowledge transfer strategies should be implemented solely. However, other
researchers argued that organizations should pursue a balanced approach which calls for the
combination of knowledge transfer strategies appropriately [19]. Reference [22] showed that
combination set of system-based and human-oriented strategies resulted in better knowledge
transfer performance. Reference [23] suggested a dynamic strategy as a combination of both
knowledge management strategies. The dynamic strategy combines the concept of human-

2
1st International Conference on Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 505 (2019) 012001 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/505/1/012001

oriented and system-based knowledge transfer strategies and emphasizes on both tacit and
explicit [23]. Organizations should consider their decision criteria when selecting their strategies.
Therefore, it is necessary to evaluate different criteria in the practice of choosing the appropriate
knowledge transfer strategy.

2.2 Knowledge Transfer Criteria

After reviewing the literature on the dynamic relationships between ERP Systems, knowledge
management and organisational characteristics, many of criteria in DeLone and McLean IS Success
Model [24] and Knowledge Management System Success (KMS) framework [25] found to be the most
relevant for this study. Reference [26] modified DeLone and McLean IS success model by adding the
factor of external IT experts to measure the success of computerisation in SMEs. Many studies have
underlined consultant involvement as one of the major determinants of successful ERP systems
implementation [27][28][29]. In accordance with reference [30], the present study contends that
consultant or external source credibility relates to the degree to which their knowledge source is
considered to be reliable and knowledgeable.

Knowledge management practice will contribute anything to the organizations’ goals only if it
receives support from their own employees. Reference [25] asserts that the commitment of the
management to provide both monetary and non-monetary rewards can improve employee efforts to
share and reuse knowledge. Motivation factors or rewards are required to motivate employees
to generate and contribute their knowledge to knowledge repositories in the organisation rather
than hoard it for their individual benefit. In the context of ERP systems, many studies of ERP projects
have proved that rewards and incentives have a significant relation with employee participation to
support the new system and reduce any resistance to the ERP project [31][32].

An organisation with good leadership stands out from its competition because it provides a rewarding
work environment where the employees at all levels are encouraged to create business value
work with others who have same state of mind and experience accomplishment in their work.
Reference [8] recognised that Indonesian SMEs are likely to have a owner manager and immediate
family member influence which designates the final decision in every organisational aspects. This
situation, where the entrepreneur or owner manager acts as dominant decision maker and facilitates
innovative business process, is reflected in this study as SME’s Owner Leadership construct.

The effectiveness of knowledge transfer process is dependent on whether the firm has sufficient
absorptive capacity before that ERP project is implemented. Therefore, it is necessary to define the term
absorptive capacity to understand organisational innovation and best practices from a knowledge
management perspective. Reference [30] studied knowledge transfer process from ERP consulting
company to an organisation and found that the organisations’ absorptive capacity and preceding
knowledge of ERP systems influence the knowledge transfer between their employees and consultants.
Absorptive Capacity is regarded as the recipients’ capability to value, assimilate and apply knowledge
of ERP system in their business activities [33].

Reference [14] shows that organisational culture influences knowledge transfer as it shapes
assumptions held by the employees in an organisation about knowledge worth exchanging. They
further argue that organisational culture defines the relationship between knowledge source and
recipients, develops social interaction where knowledge sharing can happen and shapes the knowledge
foundation and distribution process in organisations. In the ERP system implementation case, the team
members must know what the others do, gather information from end-users about their business
processes and, in return, inform the end-users and their managers about the new process being
implemented.

The abovementioned literature review of knowledge transfer criteria has established a groundwork for
developing a conceptual model that can be employed to analyse the knowledge transfer in ERP system
implementation. There are five criteria that the model on this study taken from literature review and
group decision-making results. The proposed model’s criteria includes SME owner leadership (OL),
Incentives (I), absorptive capability (AC), knowledge sharing culture (KC), and ERP vendor capability
(VC), as knowledge transfer strategy evaluation criteria.

3
1st International Conference on Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 505 (2019) 012001 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/505/1/012001

3. Methodology
A survey questionnaire, developed from the research model was distributed to a sample frame drawn
from State Ministry of Cooperative and SMEs database and mailing list of Indonesian small and
medium firms and ERP user members’ directories. The invitations to participate in survey
questionnaires were sent by e-mail and the survey link was posted online; the criteria assessment and a
set of knowledge transfer strategies were determined; any criterion with minimal score of four out of 5-
point Likert scale was included in the final list of criteria. There were 56 responses received, producing
more than the minimum threshold of 50. In terms of the proportion of the receive responses against the
overall targeted sample, the response rate of 56 completed responses from 355 invitations made a
response rate of 16%. Since the response rate for survey research in industrial studies typically fall
between 15-30% [34], the response rate of this study is acceptable by those general norms.

This study exercises an evaluation of knowledge transfer strategy selection for SMEs to successfully
implement their ERP system. This study employs multiple criteria decision making (MCDM) methods,
Analytic Network Process (ANP) [35][36], Technique for order preference by similarity to an ideal
solution (TOPSIS) [37] and Multiple Criteria Goal Programming (MCGP) to illustrate the application
and the effectiveness of the proposed model. The model was applied to evaluate knowledge transfer
strategy selection in a medium manufacturer in Indonesia as a case study. First, the selected company’s
employees were asked about the evaluation criteria for knowledge transfer strategy and invited to
participate in a survey to provide their answers. The survey results were then evaluated with experts and
practitioners who experienced about knowledge transfer strategy.

4. Results and Discussion

The knowledge transfer strategy evaluation process in ERP system implementation of
Indonesian SMEs is demonstrated as follows:

Step 1. Based on the literature review and interview with the company’s practitioners, three
knowledge transfer strategies were selected for further examination. The network relationship among
criteria was determined as follows; the criterion’s attributes of OL are related with criteria KC and I,
and the criterion’s attributes of VC are related with criteria I and AC. Moreover, the criterion’s
attributes of KC have relations with criteria I and VC; the criterion’s attributes of VC influences
criterion OL. Since the type of relationship network depends on the judgement of their users, a group
discussion among company’s practitioners and experts was formed. The group’s main task was to
check network relationship and structure of the considered criteria. Figure 1 depicts the network
relationship among the evaluation criteria, as the results of the group discussion.

I VC AC

OL KC

Figure 1. The interdependence relationship among evaluation criteria: SME owner leadership (OL),
Incentives (I), absorptive capability (AC), knowledge sharing culture (KC), Vendor capability (VC)

Step 2. The team members evaluated all of the proposed criteria pairwise assuming that there
are interdependences among them. The result as presented in Table 1 was obtained by
calculating a geometric mean of the pairwise comparison values from the team members' evaluation.
The normalized weights matrix (w1) of the proposed criteria is shown below:

KC 0.244
I 0.199
w1 = VC = 0.182
AC 0.135
OL 0.241

4
1st International Conference on Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 505 (2019) 012001 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/505/1/012001

which reflects these related criteria's local priority.

Note: SME owner leadership (OL), Incentives (I), absorptive capability (AC), knowledge
sharing culture (KC), and ERP vendor capability (VC)

Step 3. After that, the relationship between the evaluation criteria was determined. Using pairwise
comparison, the company’s team evaluated the impact of all criteria. Table 2 presents the calculation of
normalized eigenvectors for the pairwise comparison matrices. The zero values of eigenvector weights
in table 2 indicate that some of evaluation criteria are independent to each other. The rest of the values
in Table 2 show the level of the relative influence for each evaluation criterion.

Table 2. The evaluation criteria interdependence matrix

Note: SME owner leadership (OL), Incentives (I), absorptive capability (AC), knowledge sharing
culture (KC), and ERP vendor capability (VC)

Step 4. Next, the calculation of relative importance considering interdependence among criteria can be
exercised. wc was obtained by synthesizing the calculation results from previous steps: wc = w3 × w1.
The value of obtained relative importance for knowledge sharing culture (KC) = 0.288; Incentives (I)
= 0.161; ERP vendor capability (VC) = 0.247; absorptive capability (AC) = 0.190 and SMEs owner
leadership (OL) = 0.115, shown as follows:

0.288
wc = w3 × w1 = 0.161
0.246
0.190
0.115

Step 5. In order to proceed with decision making procedure, the team members compared the
knowledge strategy alternatives under each of the individual criteria to establish the decision matrix. In
addition, all team members were asked to give their valuation within the range from 1 to 10 to evaluate
each alternative’s performance with respect to each criterion. Table 3 presents the normalized decision
matrix of the knowledge transfer strategy options after the team members’ decision matrix was
constructed.
Table 3. The normalized weights decision matrix
wp KC I VC AC OL
HOS 0.448 0.507 0.346 0.553 0.620
SBS 0.333 0.314 0.193 0.201 0.192
DKS 0.218 0.179 0.640 0.247 0.187
Note: * The knowledge transfer strategies such as HOS = Human-oriented strategy, SBS = System-
based strategy, and DKS = Dynamic strategy.

Then, the overall priorities for the preferred knowledge transfer strategies wANP are determined
by multiplying wP by wc.

5
1st International Conference on Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 505 (2019) 012001 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/505/1/012001

It is demonstrated in this step that the calculation using ANP method are (HOS, SBS, DKS) = (0.472,
0.255,0.320)T. Therefore, 0.472 as the highest weights value in the human-oriented strategy (HPS) will
be selected under consideration to ANP method.

Step 6. The final ranking procedure determines the positive-ideal and negative-ideal solutions of the
knowledge transfer strategies selection problem. The results of positive-ideal and negative-ideal
calculation are shown below:
A* = (0.447, 0.506, 0.642, 0.551, 0.621),
A– = (0.219, 0.178, 0.192, 0.202, 0.186).
TOPSIS formula was employed to calculate the ranges of each knowledge transfer strategy to the
positive-ideal solution (Si +) and the negative-ideal solution (Si-), as well as determine each of the
strategy's closeness coefficient (RCj*). Table 4 presents the calculation of Si + Si- and RCj*. The table
shows that 0. 433 is the highest RCj value and it belongs to the HOS. Therefore based on the TOPSIS
calculation, the human-oriented strategy will be chosen

Step 7. Based on the calculation results from step 6, the relative closeness coefficients for each
knowledge transfer strategy were determined. Then, the MCGP model was formulated based on the
situation experienced by a medium-sized manufacturer company in Indonesia. The model consists of
the range of the strategy alternatives and specific resources constraints related to each of the strategy,
as presented in Table 5. In order to assign resources among the knowledge transfer strategies, the
objective function uses RCj (e.g., HOS = 0.433, SBS = 0.279, DKS = 0.380) as the weights (equation 1
(0.433s4- + 0.279s5- + 0.380s6-))

Table 5. Resources constraints of knowledge transfer strategies

Strategies Cost Hours Employees
HOS 3000 1056 22
SBS 8000 864 18
DKS 6500 960 20
The goal programming model formulation to select a knowledge transfer strategy is shown as follows

Min Z = (s1+) + (s2+) + (s3+) + 0.434 s4 + 0.292 s5 +0.381s6 (1)

Subject to:
3000X1 + 8000X2 + 6500X3 + s1-– s1 += 8000 (2)
1056X1 + 864X2 + 960X3 + s2-– s2 += 1200 (3)
22X1 + 18X2 + 20X3 + s3 – s3 =- 25 (4)
X1 + s4- = 1 (5)
X2 + s5- = 1 (6)
X3 + s6- = 1 (7)
X1 + X2 + X3 = 1 (8)
Xj = 0 or 1, j = 1,2,3

Using the goal programming model, the problem of knowledge transfer strategy selection was solved
by LINGO software on a AMD Athlon II-X4 CPU 3.00 GHz-based personal computer processor. The
calculation results are: x1=1, x2= x3=0. This means that the solutions are optimum and the goals are
fully achieved. Therefore, the company under study shall select human-oriented strategy as the
knowledge transfer strategy in their ERP system implementation project.

6
1st International Conference on Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 505 (2019) 012001 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/505/1/012001

5. Conclusion
When a firm is going to implement an ERP system, managers are always puzzled with selecting the
right strategy to facilitate the implementation. The knowledge transfer strategy adopted also determines
whether an ERP system implementation would succeed or fail. In order to reach this goal, management
members should find accurate criteria and employ the proper method to evaluate and solve the problem
of knowledge transfer strategy selection. This paper demonstrates how the MCDM and MCGP model
can be applied to support Indonesian SMEs in implementing their ERP system. Using this model, a
medium-size company was able to resolve the optimum knowledge transfer strategy for their ERP
system project. Results show that the human oriented strategy is the best choice for the company. This
finding also suggests that human oriented strategy is more appropriate for improving knowledge
sharing culture, absorptive capacity, SMEs owner leadership and vendor involvement within the
company.

Indonesian SMEs can achieve strategic benefits in ERP system implementation through focusing on
effective knowledge transfer strategy. While the aforementioned methods may resolve multiple criteria
problems in ERP system projects, the knowledge content quality and business requirements of
company stakeholders on the evaluating criteria have not put into the consideration. As a matter of fact,
the weightings of knowledge transfer evaluating criteria heavily depend on business strategies and
priorities. Whereas the owner manager of SMEs sometimes subjectively and arbitrarily assigns their
own weightings without discussing with the other stakeholders in the company, the selected strategy
may not reflect what that company really needs.

6. References
[1] Davenport TH 1998 Putting the Enterprise into the Enterprise System Harvard Business
Review 76 4 pp. 121-31
[2] Soja P and Paliwoda-Pękosz G 2012 Problems in Enterprise System Implementation
Across the System Lifecycle: Transition versus Developed Economies Proceedings of the
International Conference on ICT Management for Global Competitiveness and
Economic Growth in Emerging Economies pp. 88-100
[3] Saksono B 2014 "Koperasi dan UMKM dalam Angka"
http://www.neraca.co.id/article/39432/koperasi-dan-umkm-dalam-angka
[4] Yudhoyono SB 2013 "Promoting Economic Growth" Speech at the APEC CEO Summit
2013, Bali, Indonesia
http://www.oxfordbusinessgroup.com/viewpoint/president-susilo-bambang-yudhoyono-
promoting-economic-growth
[5] Ministry of Cooperatives and SMEs 2013 "Indonesian SMEs Statistics 2011-2012"
http://www.depkop.go.id/beritainformasi/data-informasi/data-umkm
[6] Seethamraju R 2015 Adoption of software as a service (SaaS) enterprise resource
planning (ERP) systems in small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) Information systems
frontiers 17 3 pp.475-492
[7] Haddara M and Zach O 2011 ERP systems in SMEs: A literature review Proceedings of
the 44th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences pp. 1-10
[8] Sarosa S 2012 The Adoption Of Tailor-made IT-based Accounting Systems Within Indonesian
SMEs From Actor Network Theory Perspective International Journal of Business Research
& Management 3 5 pp.265-278
[9] Handayani E 2008 ERP Openbravo implementation on Small Furniture Manufacturing
Company Bachelor thesis Muhammadiyah University Surakarta
[10] Soja P 2008 Difficulties in enterprise system implementation in emerging economies: insights
from an exploratory study in Poland Information Technology Development 14 1 pp. 31–51.
[11] Heinze P and Hake M 2010 Knowledge Oriented Implementation of Collaborative Supply
Chain Management Advanced Manufacturing and Sustainable Logistics 46 pp 222-233
[12] Abdallah S and Albadri F 2010 A Perspective on ICT Diffusion in the Arab Region ICT
Acceptance, Investment and Organisation: Cultural Practices and Values in the Arab World
[13] Bradshaw A, Pulakanam V, and Cragg P 2015 Knowledge sharing in IT consultant and SME
interactions Australasian Journal of Information Systems 19
[14] Năftănăilă I 2010 Factors affecting knowledge transfer in project environment Review of
International Comparative Management 11 5 pp. 834-840
[15] Ngai EW, Law CC and Wat FK 2008 Examining the critical success factors in the adoption of
enterprise resource planning Computers in industry 59 6 pp.548-564.

7
1st International Conference on Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 505 (2019) 012001 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/505/1/012001

[16] Remus U, 2012 Exploring the dynamics behind knowledge management challenges—An
enterprise resource planning case study Information Systems Management 29 3 pp.188-
200
[17] Iyengar K, Sweeney JR and Montealegre R 2015 Information technology use as a
learning mechanism: The impact of IT use on knowledge transfer effectiveness, absorptive
capacity, and franchisee performance MIS Quarterly 39 3
[18] Cahyadi I 2017 Influence of Knowledge Transfer Effectiveness on Enterprise Resource
Planning System Success in Indonesian Medium-Sized Enterprises" Advanced Science
Letters 23 12 pp. 12385-12388
[19] Davenport TH and Pruzak L 2000 Working Knowledge: How Organisations Manage
What They Know Harvard Business Press
[20] Choi SY, KangYS and Lee H 2008 The effects of socio-technical enablers on knowledge
sharing: an exploratory examination Journal of Information Science 34 5 pp.742-754
[21] Donate MJ and Canales JI 2012 A new approach to the concept of knowledge strategy Journal of
Knowledge Management 16 1 pp. 22-44
[22] Kim TH, Lee JN, Chun, JU and Benbasat I 2014 Understanding the effect of knowledge
management strategies on knowledge management performance: A contingency perspective
Information & management 51 4 pp. 398-416
[23] Hung YH, Chou SCT and Tzeng GH, 2011 Knowledge management adoption and assessment
for SMEs by a novel MCDM approach Decision support systems 51 2 pp. 270-291.
[24] DeLone WH and McLean ER 2003 The DeLone and McLean model of information systems
success: A ten-year update Journal of Management Information Systems 19 4 pp. 9-30
[25] Kulkarni UR, Ravindran S and Freeze R 2007 A Knowledge Management Success Model
Theoretical Development and Empirical Validation Journal of Management Information
Systems 23 3 pp. 309-347
[26] Hamdan AR, Yahaya JH, Deraman A and Jusoh YY 2016 The success factors and barriers of
information technology implementation in small and medium enterprises: an empirical study
in Malaysia International Journal of Business Information Systems 21 4 pp. 477-494
[27] Ifinedo P and Olsen DH 2015 An Empirical Research on the Impacts of organisational decisions’
locus, tasks structure rules, knowledge, and IT function’s value on ERP system success
International Journal of Production Research 53 8 pp. 2554-2568.
[28] Zach O, Munkvold, BE and Olsen DH 2014 ERP system implementation in SMEs: exploring the
influences of the SME context Enterprise Information Systems 8 2 pp. 309-335
[29] Ifinedo P 2008 Impacts of business vision, top management support, and external
expertise on ERP success Business Process Management Journal 14 4 pp. 551 - 568
[30] Ifinedo P, 2011 Examining the influences of external expertise and in-house computer/IT
knowledge on ERP system success Journal of Systems and Software 84 12 pp 2065-2078
[31] Hecht S, Wittges H and Krcmar H 2011 IT capabilities in ERP maintenance-a review of
the ERP post-implementation literature Proceedings of European Conference on
Information Systems ECIS 2011 p. 14-25
[32] Da Silveira GJ, Snider B and Balakrishnan J 2012 Compensation-based incentives, ERP
and delivery performance in manufacturing: Analysis from production and improvement
perspectives International Journal of Operations and Production Management 33 4 pp. 3-53
[33] Vandaie R 2008 The role of organizational knowledge management in successful ERP
implementation projects Knowledge-Based Systems 21 8 pp. 920-926
[34] Vlosky RP, Westbrook T and Poku K 2002 An exploratory study of internet adoption by primary
wood products manufacturers in the western United States Forest Products Journal 52 6 pp.
35-42
[35] Saaty TL 1996 Decision making with dependence and feedback: the analytic network process
Pittsbugrh, RWS Publications
[36] Saaty TL and Vargas LG 1998 Diagnosis with dependent symptoms: Bayes theorem and the
analytic hierarchy process Operational Research 46 4 pp. 491–502
[37] Chen SJ and Hwang CL 1992 Fuzzy Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and
Applications, Springer-Verlang, Berlin.
[38] Schrage L 2002 LINGO Release 8.0. LINDO System, Inc.