The success of a major project such as an ERP project depends entirely on

the strong and sustained commitment of the top management. This

commitment results in an overall organizational commitment when
performed at the organizational level. A visible, well-defined and felt overall
organizational commitment is a sure way to ensure successful
implementation. Therefore, top management must increase its involvement
in every procedure for successful implementation of the software. In
addition, organizations must change their way of doing business to conform
to the industry's best practices as defined by the ERP vendor to be
successful in their implementation.
Organizations need to carefully examine and understand current business
processes and the use of ERP systems to manage processes. ERP should
not be seen simply as a technological artifact that helps organizations
perform their tasks or as a fixed output productivity tool, but as a critical
technological infrastructure that is growing.
Many successful cases of the introduction of ERP systems have been
reported, but many companies have announced that their ERP systems will
fail. The failure of ERP systems or the inappropriate use of the systems will
in any case lead to a huge loss for the organization and may even lead to
bankruptcy. For these systems to work, they require significant intellectual,
material, and administrative resources, redesign of business processes and
workflow patterns, and a process of mutual adaptation of the system and
organizational structure. It could be an entire re - engineering process to
avoid silos and systems that are not integrated in the changing business
structure and organizational structure. Policies and strategies may need to
be written or modified to include the new framework. Sometimes some staff
members will be dismissed and some new ones employed. There is also a
lot of retraining of staff. All these must be done well to be successful in
implementation. In addition, the implementation of ERP involves a number
of stakeholders, including project managers, project team members
(employees from various business units), internal IT specialists, vendors
and consultants. The implementation of the ERP is supposed to strengthen
administrative authority as a governance model. This can lead academics
to fear that using a new system to make their transactions more
transparent would lead to a loss of control.
Administrative staff, however, can fear their job security by automating
redundant processes throughout the university. In addition, since ERP
systems are " large integrated packaged solutions " with dynamic
complexity, university management and IT staff, including those with a
comprehensive understanding of their own organizations, may find it
difficult to implement them. This is because universities have developed a
variety of systems that sometimes have competing functions when they
have specific requirements. Universities do not always have managers or
IT staffs who are well versed in organizational functions in the worst case
scenario. Standardization and integration, the two main features of ERP
systems, limit the flexibility of university systems. This loss of flexibility can
lead employees to create ' working rounds ' where employees try to keep
their previous processes going. This reaction to new ERP systems can
ultimately increase employees ' workload and create data gaps between
the system and reality.