Writing professional RFP letters:

Learn secrets used by countless organizations to win
contracts through an RFP-based selection process.

Get your FREE RFP Letters Toolkit, 2014 EditionGet your FREE RFP Letters Toolkit, 2014 Edition

FREE Request for Proposal (RFP) Letters, including FREE samples of Letter of Intent, Disqualification Letter, Rejection Letter, Protest Letter, and Cover Letter
Friday October 31, 2014
@ RFP Evaluation CentersHome | How to write an RFP LetterHow to write an RFP Letter | FREE RFP Letters Templates and SamplesFREE RFP Letters Templates and Samples
Writing professional RFP letters, Get your RFP Letters Toolkit 2014 Edition
              Free of charge            Immediate delivery to your email            Call 1-800-496-1303 ext. 273
Get a FREE RFP Template Sample

FREE RFP Documents including:
Successfull RFPs in Construction NEW!
RFP Template
Acquisition Plan Template NEW!
RFP Cover Letter
Proposal Cover Letter
Executive Summary Template NEW!
FREE Company Profile Template
Disqualification Letter
Rejection Letter
Non-Binding Letter of Intent
Decision Matrix
No-Bid Letter
Protest Letter
Sole Source Protest Letter
Sole Source Justification & Approval (J&A)
Letter to Decline a Proposal
Contract Award Letter
 
FREE Requests for Proposals
(RFP) Template Samples:

Software RFP Template
Process ERP RFP Template
Discrete ERP RFP Template
CRM RFP Template
Accounting RFP Template

The Best
Proposal-related Book

Latest Procurement News & Bids Opportunities from Federal Agencies

FAQ about RFP and Proposals:
MADM-Based ERP Software Selection
Compare ERP NEW!
Sealed Bids NEW!
What is Competitive Procurement?
Uniform Contract Format (UCF)
What is Sole Source?
Abstract vs. Executive Summary: Discover The Main Differences NEW!
The Bid/No-Bid Analysis NEW!
Best-known Readability Scores
Bormuth Readability Score
List of Work Words NEW!
47 FREE Affidavit Form Samples NEW!
Bidder Responsibility Determination
Bid Responsiveness Determination
Food Court RFP Examples NEW!
Meta Tag Generator NEW!

More FAQ...Expand RFP FAQ

The Best
RFP-related Book

Characteristics of the Multiple Attribute Decision Making Methodology in Enterprise Resource Planning Software DecisionsFREE RFP Letters Toolkit, 2014 Edition

by Edward W. N. Bernroider & Johann Mitlöhner

"How Firms Can Avoid Failure by Embracing a Formal MADM-Based Process for Their ERP Software Acquisition"

Bookmark and Share

Download PDF

Abstract

Realizing 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 (MADM) methodology 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 utilization, follow-up controlling, and finally 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 of financial firm level impact and service quality.

Keywords: multiple attributive decision making, madm, enterprise resource planning, erp, information systems success, empirical survey, erp software selection, erp software acquisition, erp software evaluation, erp software comparison, enterprise resource planning, madm-based software selection, multi-criteria decision making, mcdm, mcdm-based software selection.

Table of Content


Introduction

Enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems are comprehensive packaged information systems (IS) comprising several configurable modules that integrate core business activities (finance, human resources, manufacturing and logistics) into one single environment based on an integrated, shared database. They are embedded with "best practices", respectively best ways to do business based on common business practices or academic theory (Kremers & Dissel, 2000). Besides integration, the aim is to enhance decision support, reduce asset bases and costs, receive more accurate and timely information, higher flexibility or increased customer satisfaction. ERP systems are often seen as enabler for extensions such as supply-chain management and customer relationship management (Boubekri, 2001; Willis & Willis-Brown, 2002).

Several authors have proposed ERP research agendas (Esteves & Pastor, 1999). A recent agenda (Al-Mashari, 2002) gives three dimensions: ERP adoption, technical aspects of ERP, and ERP in information systems curricula. This research targets the first dimension proposed, in particular method application and relevance. Literature reports extensively on diverse problems associated with information system (IS) especially ERP system evaluation (Irani, 2002). Those problems can be derived from the difficulty of understanding the complex factors involved in IS, decision making, such as scope and impact of the decision, the concept of value and its multi-dimensional facets, natures of IS, benefits and costs, associated risks, strategy alignment, human and organizational mechanics or political issues. The evaluation of IS investment proposals has been a recognized research area for a long time resulting in a large number of evaluation techniques available today, e.g. (Irani, Sharif, Love, & Kahraman, 2002; Sassone, 1987). Research exists helping to assess the wide spectrum of methodical aids through classifications (Farbey, Land, & Targett, 1992, 1993) or selection aids (Olsen, 1996).

IS decisions have the propensity to operate under multiple, often conflicting criteria. The decision space is discrete, meaning that a limited number of alternatives and attributes need to be assessed. This is the typical setting in which Characteristics of Multiple Attribute DM in ERP Edward W. N. Bernroider & Johann Mitlöhner Communications of the IIMA 50 2005 Volume 5 Issue 1 the discipline of Multiple Attribute Decision Making (MADM) is grounded. In terms of complex IS in particular ERP decisions, their intuitive, simple and cost effective application should help to comprehend the decision making task at hand. They are relatively transparent, allowing others to see the logic of the results and enabling the inclusion of the full range of intangible consequences. Furthermore, by following a MADM based methodology the decision maker should be able to strengthen his decision outcome in terms of justifiability, accountability, and reasonability, which are regularly seen as pre-requisites of complex and risky IS decisions. The amount and depth of methods available in literature seems to be in contrast to the method application in IS appraisal practice. Since IS and their environmental embedding is becoming increasingly complex due to continuously evolving demands on IT related capabilities, the defiance of common grounds of IS decision making remains problematic. This research seeks to increase the awareness of the MADM methodology in ERP projects and to link its application to project success. With respect to ERP projects at various stages of the system's lifecycle, the targets of this research can be summarized as follows:

  1.  to provide a characterization of MADM in the given context
  2.  to give an up to date empirical manifestation of MADM elements, such as method diffusion, attribute selection, etc.
  3.  to assess if MADM approaches are relevant in terms of promoting ERP success

In the empirical data analysis, this research controls for organizational size and branch of business. The remainder of this article is structured as follows. First, we provide more information on the empirical survey and on the acquired data sample. To avoid redundant information and improve readability, theoretical MADM based considerations were given together with empirical insights in the subsequent section. Thereafter, an ERP success measurement model is given with an empirical validation, followed by an assessment of the effect of MADM on ERP success. Finally, the last section concludes results and sketches on-going research.

Download PDF "Characteristics of the Multiple Attribute Decision Making Methodology in Enterprise Resource Planning Software Decisions"

Searches related to Multi-Attribute Decision Making (MADM):
AHP Analytical Hierarchy Process Multi Attribute Utility Theory | AHP Smart MADM | Benefits Fuzzy MADM | Benefits of Multi Attributes | Business Problems Used on a Multi Attribute Utility Theory | Compare MADM Methods | Comparing MADM Methods | Comparison of Multi Attribute Decision Making Methods | Expand Competing Criteria MADM | Competing Criteria MADM | Decision Analysis Multi Attribute | Decision Analysis Multi Attributes | Decision Analysis Multi-attributes | Decision Analysis Simple Multi Attributes Rating Technique Medicine | Decision Making MADM | Decision Making MADM pdf | Decision Support for Subcontracting Procurement Based on Multi Attribute Utility Theories | Definition MADM | Definition MADM Decision | Definition Multi Attribute Decision Support Systems | Definition Multi Attribute Retrieval | Definition of Multi Attribute Decision Analysis | Difference MCDM MADM | Differences Multi Attribute Multi Criteria Decision Model | Engineering MADM Selection Faculty | ERP Selection MADM | Evaluation Alternative MADM Selection | Example of Multi Attribute Decision Making | Excel Templates Multi Attribute Utility Model | Fuzzy MADM | Fuzzy MADM .pdf | Fuzzy MADM versusersu MADM | Fuzzy Multi Attribute Decision Making Example | How to Do a Multi Attribute Decision Model | How to Make Fuzzy Decision with MADM | How to Use Multi Attributes Decision Making in Decision Process | Important Business Decisions Using Multi Attribute Utility Theory | Internacional Society on Multiple Attribute Decision Making MADM | International Society of MADM | Journal of Multi Attribute Model | MADM | MADM AHP | MADM CJ Walker | MADM Comparative Classification | MADM Conference 2006 | MADM Conference 2010 | MADM Conference 2011 | MADM Data Mining | MADM Data Mining or Knowledge Discovery | MADM Decision | MADM Decision Matrix | MADM Definition | MADM Design Definition | MADM Example | MADM Format | MADM Fuzzy | MADM Fuzzy Project Planning pdf Scheduling | MADM Java Fuzzy | MADM Java Multi Criteria | MADM Mail | MADM MCDM | MADM Methods | MADM MODM | MADM MODM AHP FAQ Filetype HTML | MADM Multi | MADM or MODM Method Selection Multiagent Data Mining | MADM pdf | MADM Ranking Fuzzy | MADM Software | MADM Technology Recruitment | MADM Theory MCDM | Make vs Buy Decisions a Process Incorporating Multi Attribute Decision Making | Math Decision Making MADM | MCDM MADM | MCDM MADM 2010 pdf ppt | MCDM MADM Decision Explanation | MCDM MADM Retrieval Term pdf | MCDM versusersu MADM | MODM MADM Differences | Multi Attribute | Multi Attribute Analysis | Multi Attribute Analysis Decision Making Concept | Multi Attribute Analysis Methodology | Multi Attribute Criteria Water | Multi Attribute Decision | Multi Attribute Decision Analysis | Multi Attribute Decision Analysis Definition | Multi Attribute Decision Making | Multi Attribute Decision Making Fuzzy Project Management | Multi Attribute Decision Making MADM Model | Multi Attribute Decision Making Matrix | Multi Attribute Decision Making Methods | Multi Attribute Decision Making Moral | Multi Attribute Decision Making Techniques | Multi Attribute Decision Process | Multi Attribute Decision Theory | Multi Attribute Matrix Excel | Multi Attribute Model | Multi Attribute Multi Criteria | Multi Attribute Utility | Multi Attribute Utility Analysis Model | Multi Attribute Utility Model | Multi Attribute Utility Model ERP | Multi Attribute Utility Theory | Multi Attribute Utility Theory AHP | Multi Attribute Utility Theory Analytic Hierarchy Process | Multi Attribute Utility Theory Decision Making Modeling Tool Worksheet Example | Multi Attributes Decision Making | Multi Attributes Decision pdf | Multi-attribute Decision Making | Multiattribute Decision Making MADM | Multi-attribute Problem | Multicriteria Decision Making Multi Attribute Utility Analysis | Multiple Attribute Decision Making MADM | New MADM Methods | pdf MADM Fuzzy | Prime Multi-attribute Projects | Procurement Marginal Utility Multi Attribute Utility Model | Qualitative Multi Attribute Models | Ranking Fuzzy Number MADM Multiple Decision Maker | Simple Multi Attribute Rating Technique | Simple Multi Attribute Rating Technique Definition | Simple Multi Attribute Rating Technique Program | Theory of Decision Making MADM | Value Engineering pdf MADM | Workshop Fuzzy MADM 2010 |

Read the Report that software vendors don't want you to know about
Compare

Close the window


Recent Searches:

A: 14 | 13 | 12 | 11 | 10 | 9 | 8 | 7 | 6 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1
 

B: 8 | 7 | 6 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1
 

C: 16 | 15 | 14 | 13 | 12 | 11 | 10 | 9 | 8 | 7 | 6 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1
 

D: 11 | 10 | 9 | 8 | 7 | 6 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1
 

E: 15 | 14 | 13 | 12 | 11 | 10 | 9 | 8 | 7 | 6 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1
 

F: 17 | 16 | 15 | 14 | 13 | 12 | 11 | 10 | 9 | 8 | 7 | 6 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1
 

G: 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1
 

H: 15 | 14 | 13 | 12 | 11 | 10 | 9 | 8 | 7 | 6 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1
 

I: 7 | 6 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1
 

J: 2 | 1
 

K: 1
 

L: 10 | 9 | 8 | 7 | 6 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1
 

M: 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1
 

N: 2 | 1
 

O: 3 | 2 | 1
 

P: 9 | 8 | 7 | 6 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1
 

Q: 1
 

R: 14 | 13 | 12 | 11 | 10 | 9 | 8 | 7 | 6 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1
 

S: 22 | 21 | 20 | 19 | 18 | 17 | 16 | 15 | 14 | 13 | 12 | 11 | 10 | 9 | 8 | 7 | 6 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1
 

T: 6 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1
 

U: 1
 

V: 2 | 1
 

W: 7 | 6 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1
 

X: 1
 

Y: 1
 

Z: 1
 

OTHERS: 3 | 2 | 1
 
Copyright © October 2014 by RFP Evaluation Centers. All rights reserved (Friday October 31, 2014)

RFP Evaluation Centers
740 Saint-Maurice Street, 4th floor
Montréal (Québec) H3C 1L5, Canada
1-800-496-1303 ext. 273 (toll free)
1-514-954-3665 ext. 273 (office)
1-514-954-9739 (fax)
Disclaimer:
We maintain this web site as a service we gracefully offer you, decision makers working at organizations whether requesting or providing external services and products, and who are interested in finding online free templates and samples of documents related to solicitation and selection processes. You are hereby cautioned not to consider the content provided on this web site and all its ancillary documents as a legal or contracting policy advice whatsoever. Indeed, this information should not be relied upon as a substitution for consulting a lawyer. We provide you, only as a convenience, with external references (books, links, etc.) that are not under our control. We are not responsible for their content and, therefore, assume no liability.

We are eager to help you out in your information quest, call us at our toll-free number 1-800-496-1303 ext. 273.