Individual Readiness for Change in the Context of Enterprise Resource Planning System Implementation

  • Leonardo Caporarello
  • Assia Viachka
Conference paper


The present study takes a rather innovative approach and investigates the organizational implications of the implementation of Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) systems in companies from people integration, process integration and information integration perspectives. In this manner we discover the ERP-specific sources of resistance that could affect negatively the deployment of the software in an organization. Then, we argue that a general set of beliefs shapes employees readiness to change to IT use and provides the foundation for resistance or for adoptive behavior. We define the concept of readiness for change in the context of ERP implementation and introduce a readiness for change assessment approach. Then, we test empirically the study hypotheses upon which the research model was build. The results obtained offer insights into factors that can improve the effectiveness of ERP implementation strategies.


Enterprise Resource Planning Enterprise Resource Planning System Change Leadership Individual Readiness Enterprise Resource Planning Implementation 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Martin TN, Huq Z (2007) Realigning top management’s strategic change actions for ERP implementation: how specializing on just cultural and environmental contextual factors could improve success. J Change Manage 7(2):121–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kwahk K-Y, Lee JN (2008) The role of readiness for change in ERP implementation: theoretical bases and empirical validation. Inf Manage 45(7):474–481CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Davenport TH (1998) Putting the enterprise into the enterprise system. Harv Bus Rev 76(4):121–131Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    De Marco M (2000) I sistemi informative aziendali: temi di attualità. Franco Angeli, MilanoGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Caporarello L, Basaglia S (2008) Sistemi ERP: un’innovazione tecnologica ed organizzativa. Egea, MilanoGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Amrani EI, Frantz R, Geffroy-Maronnat B (2006) The effects of enterprise resource planning implementation strategy on cross-functionality. Inf Syst J 16:79–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Amoako-Gyampah K (2007) Perceived usefulness, user involvement and behavioural intention: an empirical study of ERP implementation. Comput Human Behav 23(3):1232–1248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Davis FD (1989) Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Q 13(3):319–340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Holt DT, Armenakis A, Hubert A, Field S, Harris SG (2007) Readiness for organizational change. The systematic development of a scale. J Appl Behav Sci 43(2):232–255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Miller D, Madsen SR, John CR (2006) Readiness for change: implications on employees’ relationship with management, job knowledge and skills, and job demands. J Appl Manage Entrepreneurship 11(1):3–16Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Weeks WA, Roberts J, Chonko LB, Jones E (2004) Organizational readiness for change, individual fear of change, and sales manager performance: an empirical investigation. J Pers Selling Sales Manag 24(1):7–17Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Leban B, Klein A, Stone R (2006) Managing organizational change. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Reicher A, Wanous J, Austin J (1997) Understanding and managing cynicism about organizational change. Acad Manage Exec 11(1):48–59Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Parr AN, Shanks G (2000) A taxonomy of ERP implementation approaches. In Proceedings of the 33rd Hawaii international conference on system sciences, Maui, USAGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sawah S, Abd El Fattah T, Hassan Rasmy M (2008) A quantitative model to predict the Egyptian ERP implementation success index. Business Process Manage J 14(3):288–306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Venkatesh V, Morris MG (2000) Why don’t men ever stop to ask for directions: gender, social influence and their role in technology acceptance and usage behaviour. MIS Q 24(1):115–139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Oppenheim AN (1992) Questionnaire design, interviewing and attitude measurement. Continuum, London/New YorkGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Leonardo Caporarello
    • 1
  • Assia Viachka
    • 2
  1. 1.Institute of Organization and Information SystemsBocconi UniversityMilanoItaly
  2. 2.CEMS Candidate, Master of International ManagementBocconi UniversityMilanItaly

Personalised recommendations