Investigating factors influencing the decision making process for ERP adoption and implementation: An exploratory case study

The rapid developments in Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) have resulted into a borderless business environment along with an amplified market competition. Traversing through such a trend globally, organisations have significantly focused on adopting and implementing Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) systems to automate their prime business processes, enhance organisational productivity with lower costs and prompt service delivery to fulfil consumer demands. Thus, ERP systems are considered as a principal source to provide imperative information vital for strategic decision making process. On the contrary, ERP systems adoption and implementation is also highly considered as a challenging and expensive process that not only requires rigorous efforts but also demands to have an exhaustive investigation of influential factors that are critical to the adoption and implementation of ERP systems. A plethora of research studies have been theorised exploring factors influencing the decision making process for ERP adoption and implementation; however, the authors claim that these studies are not filtered comprehensively in terms of the different perspectives. Notwithstanding, the implications of such research have yet to be assessed, leaving scope for timeliness and novel research. This paper thus focuses on the ERP critical success factors from five different perspectives such as: stakeholders; process; technology; organisation; and project based on the literature analysis. These perspectives comprise of 24 factors that are imperative for a successful ERP adoption and implementation, which are validated through a qualitative single case study based research. The empirical findings illustrate that these factor help realise significant benefits such as reducing costs and saving time or extra effort

Action research as a framework to evaluate the operation of a living lab

Living lab research consists of gathering user feedback on innovations implemented in a real-life context (Eriksson et al., 2005). This can be facilitated by means of a panel-based approach (Schuurman et al., 2012). Since this panel is vital for living lab research, it is important to know whether all panel members are satisfied with the operation of the living lab itself. An interesting way to capture and act upon the delights and frustrations of a panel can be by adopting an action research approach. Within a participatory action research process, "communities of inquiry and action evolve and address questions and issues that are significant for those who participate as co-researchers" (Reason and Bradbury, 2008). Action research contrasts with many research methods, which emphasize disinterested researchers and reproducibility of findings. Amongst others, Ståhlbröst (2008) already used action research as a methodology within a living lab environment aiming to involve users early and throughout the whole development process, and to design new IT systems from the basis of these users’ needs. But how can this research approach be a framework to get to know your participants’ thoughts on the operation of your living lab? How can action research help to involve as much panel members as possible and to encourage people to share their opinion? Does active research actually result in more practical solutions for a detected problem? In order to capture and solve frustrations of the iMinds Living Lab panel members, a researcher was actively involved in a selection of living lab projects and panel members themselves were inserted in the reflection phase of an action design research from which the obtained knowledge resulted in the co-creation of an iMinds Living Labs website for panel members

Practitioner Research in libraries: a cross-sectoral comparison

Even when research conducted in public library authorities does not have a major impact on policy, it can be crucial for service development. In Spring 2003, the Centre for Information Research (CIRT) at the University of Central England carried out a series of surveys of public, academic, health, school and special libraries in the British Isles in order to obtain up-to-date information about the research issues of particular interest to staff. This indicated that there is significant interest in research, even among those librarians who are not heavily involved in research activity personally. There were a number of common themes which cut across the different library sectors, including ICT, user needs, accommodation, collections, funding, staffing and co-operation. This suggests that, while sector-specific research is necessary in some areas, in others, cross-sectoral research may help library staff to address the common problems they all face

Attitudes towards clinical services among people who self-harm: systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Self-harm is increasingly common in many countries, is often repeated and may have other negative outcomes. AIMS: To systematically review people's attitudes towards clinical services following self-harm in order to inform service design and improvement. METHOD: A search of electronic databases was conducted and experts in the field were contacted in order to identify relevant worldwide qualitative or quantitative studies. Data were extracted independently by two reviewers with more weight given to studies of greater quality and relevance. RESULTS: Thirty-one studies met the inclusion criteria. Despite variations in healthcare systems and setting, participants' experiences were remarkably similar. Poor communication between patients and staff and a perceived lack of staff knowledge with regard to self-harm were common themes. Many participants suggested that psychosocial assessments and access to after-care needed to be improved. CONCLUSIONS: Specific aspects of care that might increase service user satisfaction and treatment adherence include staff knowledge, communication and better after-care arrangements. A standard protocol could aid regular audits of users' experiences of services

A participatory approach for digital documentation of Egyptian Bedouins intangible cultural heritage

The Bedouins of Egypt hold a unique intangible cultural heritage (ICH), with distinct cultural values and social practices that are rapidly changing as a consequence of having settled after having been nomadic for centuries. We present our attempt to develop a bottom-up approach to document Bedouin ICH. Grounded in participatory design practices, the project purpose was two-fold: engaging Egyptian Engineering undergraduates with culturally-distant technology users and introducing digital self-documentation of ICH to the Bedouin community. We report the design of a didactic model that deployed the students as research partners to co-design four prototypes of ICH documentation mobile applications with the community. The prototypes reflected an advanced understanding for the values to the Bedouins brought by digital documentation practices. Drawing from our experience, three recommendations were elicited for similar ICH projects. Namely, focusing on the community benefits; promoting motivation ownership, and authenticity; and pursuing a shared identity between designers and community members. These guidelines hold a strong value as they have been tested against local challenges that could have been detrimental to the project

Care planning for aggression management in a specialist secure mental health service:user involvement

This paper describes an audit of prevention and management of violence and aggression care plans and incident reporting forms which aimed to: (i) report the compliance rate of completion of care plans; (ii) identify the extent to which patients contribute to and agree with their care plan; (iii) describe de-escalation methods documented in care plans; and (iv) ascertain the extent to which the de-escalation methods described in the care plan are recorded as having been attempted in the event of an incident. Care plans and incident report forms were examined for all patients in men's and women's mental health care pathways who were involved in aggressive incidents between May and October 2012. In total, 539 incidents were examined, involving 147 patients and 121 care plans. There was no care plan in place at the time of 151 incidents giving a compliance rate of 72%. It was documented that 40% of patients had contributed to their care plans. Thematic analysis of de-escalation methods documented in the care plans revealed five de-escalation themes: staff interventions, interactions, space/quiet, activities and patient strategies/skills. A sixth category, coercive strategies, was also documented. Evidence of adherence to de-escalation elements of the care plan was documented in 58% of incidents. The reasons for the low compliance rate and very low documentation of patient involvement need further investigation. The inclusion of coercive strategies within de-escalation documentation suggests that some staff fundamentally misunderstand de-escalation

Psychometric properties of the Mental Health Recovery Star.

BACKGROUND: The Mental Health Recovery Star (MHRS) is a popular outcome measure rated collaboratively by staff and service users, but its psychometric properties are unknown. AIMS: To assess the MHRS's acceptability, reliability and convergent validity. METHOD: A total of 172 services users and 120 staff from in-patient and community services participated. Interrater reliability of staff-only ratings and test-retest reliability of staff-only and collaborative ratings were assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). Convergent validity between MHRS ratings and standardised measures of social functioning and recovery was assessed using Pearson correlation. The influence of collaboration on ratings was assessed using descriptive statistics and ICCs. RESULTS: The MHRS was relatively quick and easy to use and had good test-retest reliability, but interrater reliability was inadequate. Collaborative ratings were slightly higher than staff-only ratings. Convergent validity suggests it assesses social function more than recovery. CONCLUSIONS: The MHRS cannot be recommended as a routine clinical outcome tool but may facilitate collaborative care planning