An Integrated PLS-SEM-TOPSIS-Sort Approach for Assessing ERP Solutions Acceptance Across Various Industries

Résumé fourni par la source

In the context of accelerated digitalization, enterprises are increasingly adopting information-driven solutions to support managerial decision-making, with Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) systems playing a crucial role in organizational development. Despite its importance, ERP adoption varies significantly across industries, particularly between developed and developing economies, where technological and structural differences persist. This paper proposes and validates a classification framework for assessing industry readiness for ERP adoption, based on an integrated PLS-SEM-MCDA methodological approach. PLS-SEM identified statistically significant factors and transformed them into weights to compare ERP user attitudes across eleven industries in Serbia and Slovenia. In addition, the TOPSIS-Sort method classified industries into high, moderate, and low readiness as predefined order classes. Finally, sensitivity analysis and comparative analysis are performed with AHP expert weights and the PROMETHEE-FlowSort method to determine the robustness of the PLS-SEM-TOPSIS-Sort results. The results show that the IT industry is the most consistent in adopting ERP systems. In contrast, other industries exhibit varying levels of readiness, depending on their degree of digital maturity and organizational preparedness. The proposed framework’s methodological flexibility allows it to be adapted to various contexts, making it suitable for future academic research and comparative studies. Additionally, the practical implications of the research are twofold. For ERP suppliers, the findings provide guidance on how to approach market segmentation and strategic positioning tailored to the specific needs of individual industries. For ERP users, their success in ERP adoption can be amplified by using the research insights as a benchmarking model.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.