Commenced in January 2007
Frequency: Monthly
Edition: International
Paper Count: 31108
Post ERP Feral System and use of ‘Feral System as Coping Mechanism

Authors: Tajul Urus, S., Molla, A., Teoh, S.Y.


A number of studies highlighted problems related to ERP systems, yet, most of these studies focus on the problems during the project and implementation stages but not during the postimplementation use process. Problems encountered in the process of using ERP would hinder the effective exploitation and the extended and continued use of ERP systems and their value to organisations. This paper investigates the different types of problems users (operational, supervisory and managerial) faced in using ERP and how 'feral system' is used as the coping mechanism. The paper adopts a qualitative method and uses data collected from two cases and 26 interviews, to inductively develop a casual network model of ERP usage problem and its coping mechanism. This model classified post ERP usage problems as data quality, system quality, interface and infrastructure. The model is also categorised the different coping mechanism through use of 'feral system' inclusive of feral information system, feral data and feral use of technology.

Keywords: Case studies, coping mechanism, Post Implementation ERP system, Usage Problem

Digital Object Identifier (DOI):

Procedia APA BibTeX Chicago EndNote Harvard JSON MLA RIS XML ISO 690 PDF Downloads 1118


[1] Esteves, J. and V. Bohorquez (2007) An Updated ERP Systems Annotated Bibliography: 2001-2005. IE Working Paper.
[2] Moon, Y.B., Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP): a review of the literature. International Journal Management and Enterprise Development, 2007. 4(3): p. 235- 264.
[3] Gattiker, T.F. and D.L. Goodhue, What Happen After ERP Implementation: Understanding the Impact of Interdependence and Differentiation on Plant -Level Outcomes. MIS Quarterly, 2005. 29(3): p. 559-585.
[4] Shang, S. and P.B. Seddon, A comprehensive framework for assessing and managing the benefits of enterprise systems: the business manager-s perspective. Information Systems Journal, 2002. 12 (4): p. 271-299.
[5] Esteves, J. Addressing the justification of Enterprise System Benefits: A Desires and Expectanacy Disconfirmation Model. in American Conference of Information Systems (AMCIS). 2005.
[6] Peng, G.C. and M.B. Nunes, Identification and assessment of risks associated with ERP post-implementation in China. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 2009. 22(5): p. 587 - 614.
[7] Yu, C.-S., Causes influencing the effectiveness of the postimplementation ERP system Industrial Management & Data Systems 2005. Volume 105,(Number 1): p. pp. 115-132.
[8] Boudreau, M.-C. and D. Robey, Enacting Integrated Information Technology: A Human Agency Perspective. Organization Science, 2005. 16(1): p. 3-18.
[9] DeLone, W.H. and E.R. McLean, DeLone and McLean model of information systems success: A ten-year update. JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS, 2003. 19(4): p. 9-30.
[10] Houghton, L. and D. Kerr, A study into the creation of feral information systems as a response to an ERP implementation within the supply chain of a large government-owned corporation. Int .J. Internet and Enterprise Management, 2006. 4(2).
[11] Topi, H., W. Lucas, and T. Babaian. Identifying Usability Issuse With An ERP Implementation. in ICEIS 2005 - HUMAN-COMPUTER INTERACTION. 2005.
[12] Elbertsen, L., J. Benders, and E. Nijssen, ERP use: exclusive or complemented? Industrial Management & Data Systems, 2006. 106(6): p. 811-824.
[13] Soja, P. and G. Paliwoda-Pekosz, What are the real problems in enterprise system adoption? Industrial Management & Data Systems, 2009. 109(5): p. 610-627.
[14] Lin, H.-F., An investigation into the effects of IS quality and top management support on ERP system usage. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 2010. 21(3): p. 335 - 349.
[15] Jones, D., et al. The Rise and Fall of Shadow System: Lesson For Enterprise System Implementation. in Association for Information Systems (ACIS 2004). 2004.
[16] Oreg, S., Resistance to change: Developing an individual differences measure. Journal of Applied Psychology, 2003. 88(4): p. 680-697.
[17] Dougherty, D., Re-imagining the differentiation and integration of work for sustained product innovation. Organization Science, 2001. 12(5): p. 612-631.
[18] Poelmans, S., Workarounds and Distributed Viscosity in Workflow System: A Case Study, in SIGGGROUP Bulletin. 1999. p. 11-12.
[19] Koopman, P. and R.R. Hoffman, Work-arounds, Make-work and Kludges. Human Centered Computing, 2003.
[20] Behrens, S. and W. Sedera, Why Shadow Systems Exist after an ERP Implementation, in 8th Pacific Asia Conference on Information Systems 2004: Shanghai. p. 1713-1726.
[21] Behrens, S. and W. Sedera. Why Do Shadow Systems Exists after an ERP implementation? Lesson From a Case Study. in Association for Information System 2004.
[22] Behrens, S., Shadow Systems: The Good, The Bad and The Ugly. Communication of the ACM, 2009. 52(2): p. 124-129.
[23] Kerr, D., L. Houghton, and K. Burgess, Power Relationship that lead to the development of Feral Systems. Australasian Journal of Information Systems, 2007. 14(2): p. 141-152.
[24] Kerr, D. and L. Houghton, Feral Systems: The likely Effect on Business Analytics Functions in an Enterprise Resource Planning System Environment, in 19th Australasian Conference on Information Systems. 2008: Christchurch, New Zealand.
[25] Kerr, D. and L. Houghton, Just In Time or Just in Case: A Case Study on the Impact of Context in ERP Implementation Australasian Journal of Information Systems, 2010. 16(2).
[26] Eisenhardt, K.M., Building Theories from Case Study Research. Academy o/Management Review 1989. 14(4): p. 532-550.
[27] Strauss, A. and J. Corbin, eds. Basics of Qualitative Research: Technique and Procedures Developing Grounded Theory. Second ed. 1998, SAGE Publications Ltd: California.
[28] Haug, A., J.S. Arlbj├©rn, and A. Pedersen, A classification model of ERP system data quality. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 2009. 109(8): p. 1053-1068.
[29] Wand, Y. and R.Y. Wang, Anchoring data quality dimensions in ontological foundations. Commun. ACM, 1996. 39(11): p. 86-95.
[30] Nelson, R.R., P.A. Todd, and B.H. Wixom, Antecedents of Information and System Quality: An Empirical Examination Within the Context of Data Warehousing. Journal of Management Information Systems 2005. 21(4): p. 199 - 235.
[31] Langenwalter, G.A., ed. Enterprise Resource Planning and Beyond-- Integrating Your Entire Organization. 2000, St. Lucie Press: Boca Raton.
[32] Amoako-Gyampah, K. and A.F. Salam, An Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model in an ERP implementation Environment. Information and Management, 2004. 41(6): p. 731-745.
[33] Singh, A. and J. Wesson. Evaluation Criteria for Assessing the Usability of ERP Systems. in Proceedings of the 2009 Annual Research Conference of the South African Institute of Computer Scientists and Information Technologists. 2009. Riverside Hotel and Conference Centre, Vaal River.
[34] Longinidis, P. and K. Gotzamani, ERP user satisfaction issues: insights from a Greek industrial giant. Industrial Management & Data Systems 2009. 109(5): p. 628 - 645.
[35] Shneiderman, B., ed. Designing the user interface: strategies for effective human-computer interaction. . 3rd ed. 1998, Addison Wesley Longman Inc.
[36] Huang, Z. and P. Palvia, ERP Implementation issues in advanced and developing countries. Business Process Management, 2001. 7(3): p. 276- 284.
[37] Xu, H., et al., Data quality issues in implementing an ERP. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 2002. 102(1): p. 47-58.