لخّصلي

According to Heiskanen, Newman, and Simila (2000), universities have different structures and decision-making processes, thus ERP software--which integrates best practices from the corporate business industry--is inappropriate for universities.Additionally, ERP systems may be challenging to adopt for university administration and IT professionals, even for those who may have a thorough understanding of their own organizations, due to their dynamic complexity as "large integrated packaged solutions" (Pollock & Comford, 2005). This is because, in response to specific needs, universities have increased their array of systems, many of which have occasionally conflicting roles (Pollock & Cornford, 2005). In the worst situation, management and IT personnel at universities may not always be knowledgeable about organizational duties. The two main characteristics of ERP systems, standardization and integration, restrict system flexibility in academic settings. Because of this lack of flexibility, employees might try to continue using their old procedures by coming up with "workarounds."According to Tsichritzis (1999), universities nowadays are compelled to acknowledge that "students are the customers and education is a business." University cultures are changing as a result of ERP adoption, which pushes academic programs to become more like businesses. One such cultural shift is "the use of managerial language and techniques" (Allen, Kern & Havenhand, 2002).The use of ERP is thought to strengthen administrative authority as a governance model.

According to Heiskanen, Newman, and Simila (2000), universities have different structures and decision-making processes, thus ERP software—which integrates best practices from the corporate business industry—is inappropriate for universities. Workplace culture has a big impact on ERP adoption. According to Tsichritzis (1999), universities nowadays are compelled to acknowledge that "students are the customers and education is a business." University cultures are changing as a result of ERP adoption, which pushes academic programs to become more like businesses. One such cultural shift is "the use of managerial language and techniques" (Allen, Kern & Havenhand, 2002). Universities may encounter resistance to ERP implementation since it entails a comprehensive shift in organizational culture in addition to the adoption of a new information technology. While management hierarchies vary from university to university, administrative and academic authority are the two main sources of authority inside a university, according to Birnbaum & Edelson (1989). The use of ERP is thought to strengthen administrative authority as a governance model. This could cause academics to worry that they won't have control over their transactions if they choose a new system that increases transparency. However, when unnecessary procedures are removed and work tasks are automated throughout a university, administrative staff members could worry about the stability of their jobs (Allen et al., 2002). Furthermore, being a "generic type of solution" from the business sector, Pollock and Cornford (2005) contend that ERP may be a high-risk approach for academic institutions. ERP solutions restrict HEI's options and promote implementing a "generic solution" in spite of its demand for specialized business operations. There is little guarantee that the procedure will be successful because there haven't been many conversations or factors taken into account regarding the difficulties that institutions may encounter while implementing generic ERP systems.
Additionally, ERP systems may be challenging to adopt for university administration and IT professionals, even for those who may have a thorough understanding of their own organizations, due to their dynamic complexity as "large integrated packaged solutions" (Pollock & Comford, 2005). This is because, in response to specific needs, universities have increased their array of systems, many of which have occasionally conflicting roles (Pollock & Cornford, 2005). In the worst situation, management and IT personnel at universities may not always be knowledgeable about organizational duties. The two main characteristics of ERP systems, standardization and integration, restrict system flexibility in academic settings. Because of this lack of flexibility, employees might try to continue using their old procedures by coming up with "workarounds." .Staff workloads may eventually rise as a result of this reaction to new ERP systems, and data gaps between the system and reality may result.