【導(dǎo)讀】組成的研究調(diào)查這個問題。結(jié)果表明，在實(shí)施ERP的企業(yè)用戶報(bào)告后實(shí)現(xiàn)經(jīng)營業(yè)績一般。很多好處，但也表明，以前與ERP的幾個好處，沒有完全實(shí)現(xiàn)。績效的積極貢獻(xiàn)，但也表明，這種積極的關(guān)系，根據(jù)具體因素進(jìn)行研究的適用性有限。本文的重點(diǎn)將是從ERP的實(shí)施（這將是操作。經(jīng)多次分析過，不給ERP系統(tǒng)的效果，在特定的直接貢獻(xiàn)。這是必要的，有助于我們本文所討論的案例研究中進(jìn)行評估ERP實(shí)施的正。和重組程序，這是ERP獲取所有原因。此外，從ERP系統(tǒng)的實(shí)施預(yù)期效益包括實(shí)實(shí)在在的好處，如降低成本，減少。ERP實(shí)施項(xiàng)目通常涉及采用公司內(nèi)部的IT和業(yè)務(wù)。有不同的利用問題，面對面的業(yè)務(wù)，決定前進(jìn)和實(shí)施ERP。這筆費(fèi)用的大部分是不相關(guān)的ERP軟件包。建立ERP系統(tǒng)所需的時間是在21個月的平均。這是由于從ERP實(shí)施的目標(biāo)和戰(zhàn)略的組織和IT目標(biāo)之間的偏離。

　　

【正文】 e 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。 Kang et al., 2020。 Loh et al., 2020。 Wieder et al., 2020), facilitate business processes (Gattiker amp。 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。 Gupta et al., 2020。 Kang et al., 2020). According to Velcu (2020), faster fulfilment of customer orders can be achieved using ERP systems. Gupta et al. (2020) and Matolcsy et al. (2020) also agree that ERP systems provide more customer satisfaction by reducing time of delivery of products. Although literature seemed to agree with the hypothesis that ERP improves performance, there were still some concerns expressed by some scholars that there might be reverse causality between pre and post implementation with a drop in some performance indicators (Hitt et al., 2020). Some researchers tried to give reasons for this. For example, Fu223。 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。A expenses to sales for ERP adopters showed a worse ratio than nonadopters indicating a fall in financial performance from this aspect. Wei (2020) added that some researchers found longterm positive effects of ERP on financial performance, while other researchers only suggest that ERP can help keep 中原工學(xué)院信息商務(wù)學(xué)院外文翻譯 16 performance asis and does not improve it from the financial aspect. This suggests that further investigations using such financial analysis are important. The Stages of ERP Benefits ERP system implementation projects have got different phases which need to be considered when analyzing the benefits achieved by ERP adopting panies. According to Esteves (2020), it takes between 1 to 2 years for business benefits to start materializing. It was also stated that an ERP project does not mature except after 3 years. ERP benefits are expected to be achieved on a continuous basis after implementing the system and not all at once (Esteves, 2020。 Wei, 2020). This was agreed upon by Gattiker and Goodhue (2020) and Matolcsy et al. (2020) when they said that benefits start to appear after the “shakedown” phase taking duration of 2 years or more. Similarly for H228。kkinen and Hilmola (2020) the “shakedown” phase is between 4 to 12 months after implementation. The reason for accumulation of benefits after the “shakedown” phase is attributed to employee learning resulting into more usage and experience with the ERP system (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。kkinen amp。 Hilmola, 2020). This was actually done by researches like Matolcsy et al. (2020) when they made their me