Evaluating and Ranking of Critical Success Factors of Cloud Enterprise Resource Planning Adoption Using MCDM Approach

Digital technology advancement and the Internet of Things (IoT) are playing a major role to take a big leap towards achieving Industry 4.0. Cloud-based data management and big data analytics have given rise to adopt Cloud Enterprise Resource Planning (CERP). The CERP has become a significant tool for the success of the information management system (IMS) which is ultimately responsible for the success of any organization. The selection of CERP depends on many critical success factors (CSFs) that must be considered while evaluating and selecting a CERP. In this work, identified CSFs of CERP are modeled using a multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) approach. The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process (FAHP) based modelling have been carried out to derive the ranking of the CSFs responsible for the CERP. The group decision-making (GDM) based AHP has also been adopted to build the decision-making model. The paper models 5 dimensions and 20 sub-criteria factors to provide the prioritized rank of dimensions and sub-criteria factors. The AHP and FAHP models identify the ranking of the 5 dimensions as Organizational Behavior, Cloud ERP Essentials, Technological Advancement, Innovational Ideas, and Environmental Impact.


I. INTRODUCTION
An enterprise resource planning (ERP) system is an application software with various modules which satisfy the needs of an organization and customers by assisting the complex problems of sharing crucial information, managing different resources, and integrating different operations of the organization's business among various departments [1]. It exchanges the information and provides backbone support to a business organization. It has become demanding for almost every organization to combat market pressure from peer organizations. It has become essential for an organization to grow to ensure market share and satisfy customers' demands. Business organizations moving towards Industry 4.0 commitment would prefer to adopt the ERP to obtain a competitive advantage globally. ERP provides a powerful information system (IS) to the organization that can manage complex customer services. It can increase operational efficiency thus more popular among business entrepreneurs. Cloud enterprise resource planning (CERP) provides access over the internet thus ensures easy access from anywhere at any time. ERP and CERP are the two variants commonly used by organizations. ERP is a factory-based system while CERP provides service irrespective of the factory premises. The selection of appropriate ERP systems that attain the business strategic need and accomplish an organizational goal is a challenge to entrepreneurs. An organization must manage its information technology (IT) infrastructure to take advantage of ERP solutions. They are also keen on CERP solutions because ERP on the premise requires substantial investment in software and hardware and its maintenance expenses. CERP permits cloud-based operations hence its services can be accessed using the cloud. It provides a cutting edge over conventional enterprise systems. Cloud computing provides improved IT services with ease [2]. This practice has distinct economic benefits, especially as it is cost-effective where the pay-as-you-go model is used by cloud service providers [3]. It is one of the primary pillars among the four pillars of Industry 4.0 [4]. CERP is an automated, scalable, and customizable IS that manages enterprise operations to retain unified organizationwide records. It ensures a more agile business solutions package that responds to evolving business needs. CERP helps in sustainable performance and enables organizations to include cloud storage of online personal data, cloud virtual machines, cloud computing platforms, and other organization-based services. Any user can use these services from any part of the world with a click of the mouse [4]. CERP is the same for on-site ERP but is substantially cheaper due to off-site implementation, support, and maintenance [5]. While theoretically, the main distinction between CERP and ERP is the programmer's geographic position which has some essential variations. It is available at affordable costs without large upfront hardware and development expenses, as device services could subscribe every month. Any organization can quickly scale the business efficiency tools with the right cloud services when its market is rising or when a new enterprise is being incorporated. CERP system is constructive for organizational performance as an alternative to the conventional ERP framework, which increases the efficiency of the decision-making method. A recent study has presented the hidden linkage between CERP and attributes of sustainable organizations [6]. Different researchers studied the attitude and intention of user in adopting CERP software such as the Diffusion of Innovation (DOI) [7]- [9], Theory of planned behavior [1], Technology Acceptance Model [1], [8], [10], [11], Technology Organization Environment (TOE) [7], [9], [12], [13], Task Technology Fit [8], and Theory of Reasoned Action [13]. Critical success factors (CSFs) are the important measurable and controllable factors, essential variables, and areas that can improve the performance of the organization, if they are taking care of properly they can flourish the business of the organization [14], [15]. Various success factors, which affect the success and failures of the CERP system. Evaluating these factors can help organizations to monitor and control a successful CERP system. This study aims at the following objectives: • To prepare a literature-based framework and identify CSFs of the CERP system.

•
To evaluate and rank CSFs of the CERP system for subsequent modeling using AHP in crisp and fuzzy environments.
The research work has been organized as follows: Section II shows the framework for the identification of CSFs in CERP, stepwise AHP and FAHP methodology is documented in Section III, whereas Section IV provides case illustration and application using AHP and FAHP methodology in the CERP. Detailed results and discussion on evaluation and ranking of CSFs of CERP are given in Section V. Section VI discusses the limitations of the present work and conclusions are given at the end in Section VII.

II. RELATED WORKS
In the information technology-based revolution, the CERP system plays a significant role hence many researchers carry out their stud on it. A detailed review of literature for CERP and MCDM based research methodology has been carried out and provides under different sub-sections, namely multicriteria-based research method and framework for the identification of CSFs in CERP.

A. MULTI-CRITERIA BASED RESEARCH METHOD
From the review of literature on CSFs of CERP and MCDM based modeling, it is revealed that many researchers have carried out studies in these areas. MCDM are used for ranking, sorting, and finding the best possible factors in different studies. AHP is one of the widely used MCDM methods for ranking and finding priority among different factors [16]. Meghna (2018) found some influential and important CERP adoption factors for multinational companies (MNCs) of India and subsequently used AHP to model and rank. The result of this research helps the vendors of CERP to find the most influential factors and make a strategy accordingly [17]. Lopez (2017) proposed GAHP Sort method with the help of AHP for sorting and finding the most suitable CERP package among different vendors which are present in the market. They have also used the Analytic Network Process (ANP) on different selected vendors to select the final vendor for CERP [16].
In the exploratory research of Bharathi (2015), 17 significant success factors were identified were modeled using AHP for sustainable CERP for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs. Selected SME partners and consultants participated in this exploratory research study. Their study found that the most important factors are related to cost. Their study can help the stakeholders in selecting a proper sustainable CERP system [18]. Quadri (2019) investigated the CSFs of Cloudbased E-Learning and employed AHP in the crisp and fuzzy environment for subsequent evaluating and ranking [15]. Nityesh (2021) Investigated and ranked several factors touching ERP adoption decision for SMEs, explicitly in the context of Indian market with the help of Fuzzy AHP method [19]. Fuzzy has also been used to create a framework for usability evaluation of different academic websites by classifying and prioritizing them [20].

B. IDENTIFICATION OF CSFs OF CERP USING LITERATURE BASED FRAMEWORK
The dimension and CFSs of CERP are very significant in identifying and adopting the CERP system for any organization. Hence, a multi-phases literature-based framework is prepared. In the initial phase various CSFs of CERP were studied. After a detailed study, their applicability for the present research was carried out. At the end of this study 28, CSFs were shortlisted in consultation of Decision Makers (DMs). In the second phase, a brainstorming session was organized for DMs. During the brainstorming, all the participants were briefed about the AHP methodology and identified CSFs. At the end of the session, 20 CSFs were identified and subsequently grouped into four dimensions. The CSFs identification thorough multi-phases literature-based framework is shown in Figure 1.

4) ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
Environmental Impact Dimension requires Regulatory support from the organizations [6]. It is also important for organizations to adopt External Vendor Support for the proper functioning and maintenance of the CERP system [40].
Where the Dimension or CSF may be represented by C1, C2, . . . Cmn. The Saaty's scale [2] as shown in Table VI may be used to provide relative importance between two Dimensions or CSFs. The consistency ratio (CR) and consistency index (CI) is calculated from equations 3 to 4 to ensure consistency where n denotes the number of criteria. The pairwise comparison matrix is acceptable if the CR is < 0.1. Table VII shows a random index for a given n.  [47]. The extension principle provides a fuzzy pairwise comparison of fuzzy numbers in decision-making.
The following section introduces the fuzzy set theory and extension principles:

i) Fuzzy Set Theory
The fuzzy set theory provides the use of fuzzy arithmetic operations that involves fuzzy numbers. The DMs may use various types of fuzzy numbers i.e. TFN, TrFN as per their capability and provides a pairwise comparison. The TFN (l1, m1, n1) can be used in pair-wise decision-making [48]. A TFN is shown in Figure 2. The various arithmetic operations may be performed using fuzzy numbers [49], considering fuzzy numbers ̃1 = ( 1 , 1 , 1 ) and ̃2 = ( 2 , 2 , 2 ).

ii) Application of the theory of Extent analysis in MCDM in fuzzy environments
Two triangular fuzzy numbers (TFNs) can be compared using the Extent principle [50]. A set of priorities and a set of targets may be viewed as two sets, i.e. Y={ 1 , 2 ,………, } and Z={ 1 , 2 ,………, 3 } respectively. Therefore, each objective can be identified employing the extension principle. Extent analysis is performed to achieve the set goal. Considering f extent analysis, the following objective may be obtained: Where ( = 1,2, … ) are various TFNs and represented by fuzzy numbers (k,m,n). The extent analysis transformation further explained.
Step 1: To establish relationship structure for CERP adoption using Dimension and CSFs The CERP relationship structure possesses the main objective of evaluation and prioritization of Dimensions and CSFs. Thus using the Dimensions and CSFs under various dimension group a relationship structure can be established into a various stepwise hierarchy. .

Step 2: To obtain pair-wise comparison for dimension and
CSFs of CERP The CERP structure has Dimension s and CSFs into a different hierarchies. Each Dimension may be compared with another dimension or CSF may be compared with another CSF. The final pair-wise comparison of each Dimension and CSFs of CERP can be obtained with the help of DMs.
Step 3: To perform fuzzy synthetic extent analysis Using fuzzy summation of TFNs, f extent analysis values ∑ =1 , may be obtained as: and , gives the fuzzy summation of ( = 1,2, … , ) values are calculated as The inverse of the vector may be obtained as: Step 4: To obtain the degree of possibility of supremacy for two TFNs i.e. 2 = ( 2 , 2 , 2 ) ≥ 1 = ( 1 , 1 , 1 ) and can be represented as: The two TFNs i.e. ( 1 , 1 , 1 ) and ( 2 , 2 , 2 ) intersect at d which is shown in Figure 3. It also gives ordinate d, from the possible highest intersection between two fuzzy numbers 1 and 2 denoted as Q. Thus 1 and 2 , maybe calculated through the values of V ( 1 ≥ 2 ) and V ( 2 ≥ 1 ).

Step 7: To obtain the final rank of each Dimension or CSFs
The product of Dimension and CSFs of CERP will provide global weight that may be considered for the final ranking of each Dimension and CSFs of CERP. The obtained priority may be arranged into a descending order to get the ranking.

III. APPLICATION OF MCDM BASED METHODOLOGIES IN THE CERP
The MCDM based AHP and FAHP may be thus employed to evaluate and prioritize the Dimensions and CSFs of CERP. VOLUME XX, 2017 9 Various feedback from the DMs group maybe further synthesized. Five expert DMs from various organizations were selected to provide feedback in the prioritization of CSFs of CERP. A multiphase framework based on a literature review was followed. The relationship matrix consisting of four Dimensions and twenty-four CSFs identified using the feedback of the brainstorming session. Figure 4 indicates the relationship structure derived using the multiphase framework of CERP. Various Dimensions of CERP are evaluated by DMs and shown in   FAHP has also been applied for the CERP Dimension and Factor's weight calculation and to get its ranking. TFN scale values as shown in Table XIII have been used in attaining the weights for the CERP Dimensions and its Factors. The systematic research methodology as illustrated in the previous section has been pursued to determine the weights. Table XIV shows the weights after the pairwise comparison of the CERP Dimensions of using FAHP. Table XV shows the composite weights and ranks of CERP Factors obtained through the FAHP using TFN. The prioritization obtained using AHP and FAHP may be compared and shown in Table XVI. Moreover, Figure 5-6 shows the weights of dimensions and their respective factors. While Figure 7 shows the overall ranking of factors using AHP and FAHP.

IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
The MCDM is useful in critically analyzing factors, CSFs and dimensions etc. to help in decision making in selecting a potential ERP or CERP system. Since CSFs play a vital role for selection of CERP for any organization so that administrative manager can buy an appropriate ERP/CERP system for the organization. The selected ERP/CERP system must be in a position to cater the needs of the organization. Looking to the requirements AHP and Fuzzy AHP based modeling has been used in the present condition. The AHP and FAHP have great potential to evaluate and rank the Dimensions and CSFs that are significant decision-making parameters while selecting CERP for any organization. Based on the selected Dimensions and CSFs the stakeholders will be able to carry out smooth and efficient execution of the CERP system. It would be easy for business entrepreneurs to constantly review, track, and handle their CERP system to align with their strategic objectives. Since expensive infrastructure (hardware and software) technologies are needed to support the effective and robust execution of CERP, the CSFs can assist in efficient resource planning and management. The accurate prioritization can be obtained using AHP and FAHP ranking and their subsequent comparison.  Figure 8. The value -1 indicates a near-perfect negative connotation of ranks and +1 indicates a near-perfect positive connotation of ranks. Zero will indicates no connotation between the ranks. The closer the value is to zero, the weaker is the association between the ranks. The graph clearly shows the nearly perfect positive connotation of ranks by both methods. The administrative managers face dilemma while selecting ERP/CERP systems for the organizations. The present findings will help administrative managers to take robust decision in selecting ERP/CERP systems to suit the need of the organization. The administrative managers will be in a position to use these models to make procurement decision wisely.

V. LIMITATIONS AND SCOPE FOR FUTURE WORK
The Dimensions and CSFs are important in the selection of the CERP system for any organization hence due care must be taken while modeling them for required objectives. The smooth and effective implementation of the CERP system may be carried out by controlling the Dimensions and CSFs. The priority and ranking of CSFs of CERP obtained can be generalized with various degrees of acceptance. The present research adopted the MCDM approach and used a limited number of DMs for AHP and FAHP. A broad DMs group can be used in future studies. The weight and rank of CSFs of the CERP may be evaluated using other MCDM approaches.

VI. CONCLUSION
Organizations witness the increasing use of information technology, internet speed, and electronic communication in today's business. The organization also feel the pressure of the local and global competition hence to combat such pressure organization has to rely on new tracking-tracing and information exchanges system like CERP to improved information flow, material flow and financial flow. However, the CERP selection may pose a great risk to organizations opting for the CERP system. Further, CERP implementation also needs a deep understanding of the process hence organization must follow the standard implementation guidelines for its successful implementation. Due care must be taken while selecting and implementing the CERP system. The right selection and implementation of the CERP system will be able to cater to the need of all stakeholders which demands the evaluation and ranking of CSFs of CERP. Thus, the evaluation and ranking of CSFs of CERP will help all its stakeholders. The user organization may take full advantage of the CERP system to fulfill their strategic objectives whereas the service providers will get business volume on satisfying the customer demand. The MCDM method like AHP and FAHP provides an easy and systematic methodology to assess the organizational needs for its CERP requirement.