【正文】 e and do not give a direct contribution of the effect of the ERP system in specific. An example of this would be the study by Hitt et al. (2020). The reason for the insufficiency can be seen in that the financial benefits are measured quantitatively。 Hilmola, 2020。 Goodhue, 2020), and provide better information management (Federici, 2020). Operational aspects like lead time can also be shortened by utilizing ERP systems (Cotteleer amp。 Bendoly, 2020). Generally and as a result of the possible delays of ERP benefits after implementation during the “shakedown phase”, it is remended not to measure business performance during this period heavily quoted by literature. The reason for this is that it would be inaccurate to measure productivity and impact as the business wouldn’t have stabilized yet (H228。 et al. (2020) suggest that servicessector business (like banks) adopting ERP usually anticipate and utilize ERP systems for effectiveness more monly than efficiency, therefore cost reductions and productivity might not be as important for them as better quality business processes and better information quality. For such ERP adopters making efficiency and productivity measurements is inaccurate and can have negative causality. Therefore, previous research has found contradicting findings regarding the effect of ERP systems on business performance. While some researchers have found that ERP systems can affect overall business performance positively, others have only found ERP systems to affect specific areas and not the overall business performance. This can then suggest that ERP systems do not always affect business performance positively and some contributing factors affect this relationship (Kang et al., 2020). In addition, some studies also contradict that sufficient financial benefits are achieved after ERP implementation. This can be seen for example when Kennerley and Neely (2020) concluded that return on sales in specific was found unaffected after implementing ERP systems. The study by Wieder et al. (2020) also stated that some research found that specific financial benefits of ERP systems were not accumulated when paring between ERP users and nonERP users. Nicolaou (2020) stated that the ration of Gamp。 Rei, 2020). This phenomenon of vanishing returns on IT investments was called the productivity paradox and can be described as Pavlou et al. (2020) stated: “previous literature has not conclusively shown that IT investments have a positive effect on either firm or process performance.” This phenomenon was named as a productivity paradox because the findings on productivity contradicted the expectations of IT investors who thought that IT investments would improve business performance (Anderson et al., 2020). Researchers have added that specific factors facilitate the positive relationship between IT and business performance like organizational change, innovation and increased employee skills (Pilat, 2020). Such factors which contribute to the phenomena of the IT paradox were also pointed out by Hamilton and Asundi (2020) and include the false measurements of output to measure productivity, measurements done before the long payoff time until when returns on IT investments accrue, economywide measurements errors due to rearrangements of output, and mismanagement. False measurements were supported by other research like Almutairi (2020) and Rei (2020). In addition, the research which was involved in the productivity paradox usually measured the effect of IT on the services sector (Pilat, 2020). IT investments in the services sector may be misleading because their IT contributes to better customerservice quality (which is their main business goals required for them from adopting IT) more often than administrative and internal efficiencies. Another issue is that in the early days of IT, the full adoption of the technology was slow with little activities towards development of employee skills to use the technology and with business process reengineering. This has been defined by (Pilat, 2020) as the process of “IT diffusion”. In addition, the studies pertaining to the productivity paradox have been measuring the IT effect on business performance too early after adoption before benefits materialized. The paradox was also attributed to management strategies that prohibit the efficient usage of IT technologies, and is currently heavily refuted and found to be incorrect (Pilat, 2020). Application: ERP and Business Performance Benefits 中原工學(xué)院信息商務(wù)學(xué)院外文翻譯 15 This section will discuss the relation between ERP systems as a specific example of IT with business performance and productivity. ERP was found to save costs (Huang et al., 2020。 Nicolaou, 2020). Such perceived benefits are expected because ERP help make production inside manufacturing panies more efficient by integrating information from other departments like sales and procurement into the production system, which as a result helps eliminate costs and improve production schedules (Matolcsy et al., 2020). This discussion leads to the observation that measurements of business performance should accurately match the reasons behind ERP implementation unique to each specific organization. ERP Projects ERP systems are usually implemented as projects. ERP implementation projects usually involve selecting the ERP vendor, establishing business process reengineering, implementation, and evaluation of the adopted system (Wei, 2020). ERP implementation projects normally involve internal IT amp。 附注： 本文摘自“ ERP 系統(tǒng)實施對企業(yè)績效的影響 ”， 2020 年第六期 112 至 120 頁 。例如， 希特等 （ 2020）指出，有可能是行業(yè)中的地位和衡量企業(yè)經(jīng)營業(yè)績時，可能發(fā)生在市場的沖擊所造成的影響。 （ 2020 年）的母雞，他們說，利益開始出現(xiàn)“勒索”階段后 2 年或以上的時間。 Nicolaou（ 2020 年）指出，銷售ERP 系統(tǒng)采用的 G＆ A 費用的口糧顯示更糟的比例比非采用表明在這方面的財務(wù)業(yè)績下降。對于這樣的 ERP 的采用，使效 率和生產(chǎn)力的測量是不準確的，可以有負面的因果關(guān)系。 Wieder 等，2020），方便的業(yè)務(wù)流程（ Gattiker＆ Goodhue， 2020 年），并提