SACI 2018 • IEEE 12th International Symposium on Applied Computational Intelligence and Informatics • May 17-19 • Timiúoara, Romania

Fit Gap Analysis Methods for ERP Systems

Literature Review

Ieva Ancveire
Information Technology Institute
Riga Technical University
Riga, Latvia
ieva.ancveire@rtu.lv

Abstract – Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) systems are
used for enterprise business processes execution and
management. Selection of an appropriate ERP system is one of
the important tasks in the overall implementation process, and a
fit-gap analysis is used for these purposes. The fit-gap analysis
allows evaluating gaps in business requirements and functionality
of ERP systems considered for evaluation. Despite the
importance of the fit-gap analysis in the implementation
processes, it heavily relies on a judgmental analysis and requires
a significant effort. The objective of the proposed research is to
simplify the fit-gap analysis process. The present paper aims at
identifying the existing fit-gap analysis in the related literature. A
systematic literature review is performed using the defined
scientific databases. It focuses on the fit-gap method design for
specific ERP systems, as well as methods suitable for different
types of ERP systems. The research results are the fit-gap
analysis methods and their advantages and limitations. The
selected literature also reviews typically used methods for
reducing gaps.
Keywords—ERP projects, fit-gap analysis, ERP customization
I. INTRODUCTION
Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) systems are large
information systems used to run enterprise business processes.
They are typically packaged applications providing
standardised functionality. The main issues of the latest
technologies are the necessity to increase business profit and
reduce project time and costs [1]. This type of a system has a
potential for managing companies’ resources [2] [3].
The enterprise sets requirements for ERP systems, and
often there are gaps between functionality provided and the
requirements. These gaps should be addressed during the
implementation of the ERP system by either modifying the
ERP systems or changing enterprise processes. The
functionality gaps should be identified and evaluated. The fit-
gap analysis is a method for evaluation of correspondence
between functionality provided by ERP systems and the
enterprise needs.
This type of analysis method evaluates the comparison
between the ERP system functionality and the enterprise needs.
It estimates and demonstrates gaps (or fits) in many areas, first
of all, in ERP systems, the ERP system functionality and
business requirements, as well as in the decision process [1].
Secondly, it identifies gaps in the ERP system unique artifacts
and enterprise context [4], also in the ERP system and
enterprise required functionality [5]. As a result, the list of fits
and gaps is obtained.
Despite the importance of the fit-gap analysis in the
implementation processes, it heavily relies on a judgmental
analysis and requires a significant effort. Additionally, the fit-
gap analysis is often limited to the identification of gaps and
potential solutions for every item individually without
investigating relationships among them. The overall goal of the
present research is to propose a method for a comprehensive
fit-gap analysis allowing one to identify different types of gaps
and evaluate a set of potential solutions. The objective of the
paper is to review the existing research concerning the fit-gap
analysis and identify advantages and limitations of the current
methods.
The paper aims at identifying the fit-gap analysis methods
in the scientific literature, determining the advantages and
limitations of the methods, as well as proposing potential
solutions for reducing gaps.
A systematic literature review [6] is performed to answer
the research questions: (1) What are the main reasons for the
gaps? (2) Which fit-gap analysis methods are described in the
scientific literature? (3) What are the possibilities to reduce the
gaps?
The rest of the paper is structured as follows. Section II
describes the research methods. The detailed review results are
reported in Section III, but Section IV concludes the paper.
II. METHOD
A. Background
ERP systems are implemented in different organisations
having a variety of business processes. The need to execute
these business processes sets requirements for enterprise
information systems. These requirements can be specified in a
variety of forms ranging from formal models to informal and
tacit specifications. On the other hand, there are functionalities
and capabilities provided by ERP systems. This functionality is
defined by vendors of the ERP systems and often is referred to
as best practice processes [7]. The best practice processes can
be customized to various degrees, and there are various

978-1-5386-4640-3/18/$31.00 ©2018 IEEE 000161

 I. Ancveire • Fit Gap Analysis Methods for ERP Systems
customization techniques, including configuration, end-user
development, plug-ins and custom programming.
The fit-gap analysis usually compares the enterprise
requirements and the best practice processes to the ERP
system’s best practice processes (Fig. 1). The results of the
comparison, in this case, are the following: (1) the list of fits or
required functionality fully supported by the ERP systems, and
(2) the list of gaps or requirements not fully supported by the
ERP systems. The list of gaps is often supplemented by
suggestions how to address these gaps and estimation of the
effort needed to reduce the gaps. Enterprises have incentives to
select ERP systems best fitting their needs.
Fig. 1. Fit Gap analysis
This analysis can be performed at various stages of the ERP
system implementation process [5], [8], [9]. There are also
different types of gaps: (1) Data gaps; (2) Process gaps; (3)
Output gaps [10].
The data gaps can usually be identified at the design stage.
They arise between data formats into the ERP system and the
enterprise business process [11]. Process gaps (functional gaps)
are considered within the scope of the proposed research, but
output (technical gaps) are often assessed during the
preparation for or after go-live [12].
B. Review process
The literature review process (Fig. 2) follows the structured
literature review guidelines [6], and it has been performed at
the three stages.
First of all, the keywords have been identified. The
keywords defined and used for identifying the articles are the
following: (1) “Fit-Gap Analysis ERP projects”, “Fit-Gap
Analysis”, “Fit-Gap Analysis dimensions”; (2) “Fit-Gap
Analysis ERP”, “Fit-Gap Analysis application projects”, “Fit-
Gap Analysis application project management”, “Fit-Gap
Analysis application project implementation”, “Gap Analysis”
“Fit Analysis”, “Fit Analysis dimensions”, “Gap Analysis
dimensions”, and “Analysis dimensions”.
In the literature selection process, the four scientific
databases have been used: IEEE Xplore Digital Library –
000162
IEEE/IET full-text journals; ScienceDirect – scientific and
technical database; ACM – computer science publications
database; SCOPUS – Bibliographical research literature
citation database.
In addition, the following search has been used to focus on
the most relevant articles: (1) scientific articles that have been
published since 2010; (2) articles that match the categories – a
scientific article, conference paper, conference review; (3) the
articles that match the subject – “Computer Science”.
Fig. 2. Literature selection process
As a result, 9 articles have been found using the primary
search keywords, and 340 articles have been found using the
secondary search keywords. A total of 349 articles have been
found. 47 out of 349 articles have been selected after duplicate
elimination and abstract analysis. 11 out of 47 articles have
been selected after a full-text analysis. In addition, seven earlier
cited original articles in the 11 articles above have also been
selected. At the last stage, the final list consisting of 18 articles
has been created for a detailed review. These articles are
discussed in the next section.
III. RESULTS
A. Detailed review
The first and second research questions are described in 10
articles and detailed in this paragraph. The ERP systems are
typically packaged applications provided by their vendors, and
many ERP related methods and technologies are often
associated with an individual for the vendor. Therefore, in the
present research, a distinction between two categories of fit-gap
analysis methods is made: (1) those developed for the ERP
system; and (2) those that may consider universal methods
suitable for different types of ERP systems.
The detailed review is provided in Table 1. The first four
articles belong to the first category of methods developed for
the special ERP system. The first of them is intended for the
family of Microsoft Dynamics ERP systems. The author
proposed a method based on the Microsoft Sure Step
 SACI 2018 • IEEE 12th International Symposium on Applied Computational Intelligence and Informatics • May 17-19 • Timiúoara, Romania

methodology and SeCSE processes [13]. The original fit-gap
method included in Microsoft Sure Step is modified to allow
for iterative evaluation. The specific page of the fit-gap
analysis is included in the method and used to create functional
design configuration documents [2]. As a result, it gives a list
of possible services and descriptions for configuration
possibilities. The iterative evaluation and gap documentation
give the opportunity to develop actual software requirement
specifications and update these requirements. The method is
applied successfully in the implementation of Microsoft
Dynamics AX 2009.
Hustad et al. [3] investigate the fit-gap analysis with a focus
on customization techniques used to reduce ERP and
organisational misfits. The investigation is based on the
conceptual framework describing types of misfits and selection
of techniques for tailoring ERP systems. The types of misfits
are categorised according to the two dimensions: the source of
misfit (i.e., imposed/voluntary) and the nature of misfit (i.e.,
deep/surface). The tailoring methods considered are reports,
interfaces, enhancements, forms, workflows, and portal. The
framework is applied in a single case study of SAP
implementation using the Accelerated SAP (ASAP)
methodology with the fit-gap analysis. The results have
shown that a majority of misfits execute, and the customization
is the most typically used form for enhancements. The authors
indicate that some of the gaps are caused by customers not
knowing and understanding the functionality and standard
processes of the ERP system.

TABLE I. ANALYSIS OF ADVANTAGES AND LIMITATIONS

Literature source Method Advantages Limitations
Nöbauer et al. [2] S3C (1) the business process analysis, the collection of Dependence on proprietary tools.
the business requirements and the fit-gap analysis
are integrated into one service;
(2) all activities are performed iteratively.
Hustad et al. [3] Fit-gap analysis with (1) the method is realistic; Tested on the SAP ERP system only.
Accelerated SAP (ASAP) (2) the method focuses on each gap individually.
methodology
Gulledge [14] SAP gap-fit (SAP Business (1) the detailed description ix provided; (1) the method is used for the SAP system only;
Process Reference Model) (2) the method is process-oriented. (2) suitable for large-scale enterprises;
(3) the method does not fully work if it is not
possible to identify all internal enterprise
processes.
Wu et al. [15] ERP selection (1) the method uses the mathematical algorithm for (1) it is not possible to compare several ERP
methodology with the gap the gap analysis; systems at the same time;
analysis method (2) the algorithm is executable in several steps. (2) there is a risk to develop incorrect use case
diagrams;
(3) it is not always possible to develop details for
all cases of use.
Syamsuddin [16] Gap analysis framework The dimensions of the ITPOSMO joined with the The method is used for the Cloud Health
ServQUAL dimensions have increased the features Information Systems only.
in the Cloud Health Information Systems.
Pajk and Kovacic [1] Fit-gap reference models (1) the method allows categorising and prioritising (1) the result of analysis could be wrong; it may
business processes; begin with failures in the design models;
(2) the method improves the quality of the (2) if the enterprise uses this method, then the
analysis. business process priority order needs to be cleared.
(3) if the enterprise uses this method, they should
be clear which processes to automate.
Parthasarathy et al. [8] PRCE framework with the (1) fit-gap analysis is carried out in collaboration Requires significant effort from human experts.
fit-gap analysis method with stakeholders;
(2) the fit-gap analysis is ensured using prioritised
requirements;
(3) the overall degree of correspondence is
estimated between requirements and ERP
functionality.
Sun et al. [12] ERP implementation (1) definition of success factors; Complex application.
model (2) multi-stage evaluation process.
Millet [17] Model-driven fit-gap (1) the business requirements model and system’s (1) the knowledge of modelling is necessary;
analysis model comparison; (2) a lot of people are involved in the modelling
(2) integration with the design phase; and the other method processes;
(3) the iterative process of fit-gap analysis. (3) development of the accurate models is
impossible or complicated.
Shiang-yen [18] Gap analysis (1) application in different areas; (1) the method is tested with the SAP system only;
(2) the method identifies the source of gaps; (2) the framework is not automated.
(3) classification of mismatches;
(4) the method enables the identification of impact
of the gaps.

000163
 I. Ancveire • Fit Gap Analysis Methods for ERP Systems
Wu et al. [15] also suggest using the Accelerated SAP
(ASAP) with the fit-gap analysis method as one of the gap
identification methods. The authors of the article have
investigated the algorithm to identify the gaps, and the
algorithm has been tested in a case study with SAP R/3 system.
The algorithm is implemented in several steps. The first steps
deal with data collection concerning enterprise requirements,
which are used to create the goal-based use case, activity
diagram and data glossary. This information is used in scenario
modeling. The scenario modeling involves the comparison
process resulting in the selection of the best matching ERP
system. The gap analysis process is evaluated during the
scenario matching step. The result of this step is the list of the
gaps between the enterprise and the ERP system.
Similarly, the fit-gap analysis method is tested on the SAP
ERP system [14]. In this case, the method is used in projects
requiring the comparison of enterprise business processes with
standard system processes. The paper represents detailed fit-
gap analysis process steps used to compare software executed
processes to desired organisational processes, and the
comparison process documented at the end of the procedure.
The role of SAP consultants is to provide a detailed
understanding of design. An outcome of the analysis process is
a suitability document, where fits and gaps are documented.
The presented fit-gap analysis method gives the best results in
large-scale and complex projects, and is suitable only for the
SAP system. A business process management tool integrated
with the SAP ERP systems is used (ARIS Business Process
Architect). This tool provides the entire process library and
packages included in the SAP system.
The fourth article on package-specific methods offers a
novel approach to the fit-gap analysis. It helps detect gaps in
Cloud Health Information system [16]. The fit-gap analysis
method is based on the methodology called ITPOSMO [19]
and the service quality evaluation approach ServQUAL [20].
The suggested method allows estimating the gaps at a high
level of abstraction without considering technical aspects of
information systems under investigation. It does not describe
the determination of the overall suitability of the system, and
applications of the method are not reported. The method is not
tested for similar systems.
In Table 1, the remaining articles report research on
universal or ERP package independent fit-gap analysis
methods. Pajk et al. [1] develop a method based on the fit-gap
analysis and reference-modelling. Business process reference
models are used to describe different levels of business
processes. This method allows (1) using the validated source of
business processes; (2) implementing them according to the
company’s needs; (3) improving the choice of the ERP system;
and (4) eliminating the gaps [1]. An application example
demonstrates the application of the method using the Dynamics
NAV Process Reference Model in the supply chain business
process provided. However, the main disadvantage of the
method is application cost. There is also a risk that mistakes are
made in business process modelling.
The requirements prioritization and traceability also play an
important role in the identification of functionality gap [8]. The
proposed fit-gap analysis framework includes customer
000164
requirements collection at the first stage. It focuses on the three
levels of customer requirements: application requirements,
process requirements and design requirements. At first, all
requirements are prioritized to obtain the Prioritized Software
Requirements Specification. The Prioritized Software
Requirements Specification and Software Requirements
Specification of the ERP system are compared to determine the
percentage of compatibility with the defined requirements and
the ERP systems’ functionality. A higher level of compatibility
reduces the amount of ERP system customization and can
develop the most cost-effective customization plans.
Sun et al. [12] propose the method based on the
mathematical model, which was evaluated in multiple case
studies. The objective of these case studies is to evaluate and
improve the method of the ERP system implementation,
including the fit-gap analysis. The authors define the success
factors and the key-performance criteria, which help identify
the ERP process gaps at the initial phase of the development
process before selecting the ERP system. The authors
concluded that the fit-gap analysis enabled the enterprises to
eliminate performance gap by adapting their business
requirements to the ERP system.
Millet [17] evaluates the suitability of ERP systems
according to the enterprise needs in the context of enterprise
architecture. The ERP implementation project is viewed as an
iterative process of research alignment among requirements,
ERP capabilities and existing applications and technologies.
ERP implementation activities are mapped to the standard
enterprise modeling framework. Three illustrative cases are
provided. However, the method requires effort as well as
technical expertise from its users.
Finally, Shiang-yen et al. [18] review types of ERP misfits
investigated in the literature and propose a framework for
identifying and classifying misfits. Impact of the misfits on
organisations is defined. The authors tested the framework in
the case study at an electronic service provider company. The
method allowed managers to identify gaps and make decisions
on the reduction of these gaps.
B. The result of article analysis
The results of the detailed analysis (Table 2) indicate that a
majority of the papers on the fit-gap analysis describe methods
specific to the ERP system (11 papers). Platform independent
methods are described in 5 papers. Three papers do not
elaborate new fit-gap analysis methods but focus on the
evaluation of advantages and limitations of the fit-gap analysis
in general or report application cases. Emphasis is placed on
methods specific to the ERP systems, the application limits of
these methods are compared to cases when the ERP package is
already selected rather than to cases when fit-gap analysis
results provide information for selecting among multiple
alternative ERP systems.
The fit-gap analysis yields a list of gaps identified, and
most of the papers also discuss methods for reducing the gaps.
These methods are categorised as ERP modification, business
process changes, traceability and prioritization of requirements,
third-party application software and customer or project team
knowledge (Table 3).
 SACI 2018 • IEEE 12th International Symposium on Applied Computational Intelligence and Informatics • May 17-19 • Timiúoara, Romania

TABLE II. THE ARTICLES' ANALYSIS RESULTS type of input information because enterprises specify their
The analysis estimation criterion Source requirements in various formats. A continuous gap
Articles describing methods of fit-gap [1], [2], [3], [8], [12], [14], [15], management process is also required.
analysis [16], [17], [18]
Articles describing universal methods [1], [8], [12], [17], [18] The gap reduction methods identified belong to the five
of fit-gap analysis groups: (1) ERP system modification; (2) Business process
Articles describing gap reduction [1], [2], [3], [4], [8], [11], [12] [14], modification; (3) Traceability and prioritization of
methods [15], [17], [21], [22], [23], [24], requirements; (4) Use of third-party application software; and
[25], [26], [27] (5) Training of customer or project team. A majority of studies
suggest a costly modification of the ERP system or a change in
business processes. The ERP system modification is the best
TABLE III. GAPS REDUCTION METHODS solution for the case when business requirements are defined.
The knowledge of ERP usage could also reduce the gaps.
Gaps reduction approaches Source
ERP modification [3], [8], [11], [14], [15], The future research will focus on the development of a
[17], [21], [22], flexible fit-gap analysis method aimed at addressing the
[23], [24], [27]
limitations above the existing methods.
Business process customization [1], [8], [11], [12], [15], [21], [23],
[25], [27] Currently, ERP systems are undergoing significant changes
Traceability and prioritization of [2], [8], [26] due to the emergence of cloud computing, mobile technologies,
requirements
Third-party application software [1], [11], [27]
Industry 4.0, machine learning and similar technologies. This
Customer or project team [3], [4], [11], [14], [23] creates additional requirements for the fit-gap analysis because
knowledge there is an increasing variety of gap reduction methods and
technologies.
The review of fit-gap analysis methods allows presenting
company’s requirements, which should be supported by REFERENCES
technology, and systematically identifying incompatibilities [1] D. Pajk and A. Kovacic, “Fit Gap Analysis – The Role of Business
[28]. These methods have a few limitations to be addressed in Process Reference Models,” Econ. Bus. Rev., vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 319–338,
2013.
the future research. First of all, significant effort and human
[2] M. Nöbauer, N. Seyff, N. Maiden, and K. Zachos, “S 3 Cௗ: Using
resources are needed to use them, and automation is required. Service Discovery to Support Requirements Elicitation in the ERP Domain,”
Secondly, the methods require specific knowledge. Thirdly, the pp. 18–32, 2011.
methods have a limited application area to one or some similar [3] E. Hustad, M. Haddara, and B. Kalvenes, “ERP and organizational
ERP systems. Fourthly, they are restricted to a single misfits: An ERP customization journey,” Procedia Comput. Sci., vol. 100, no.
development phase, while the fit-gap analysis is relevant at 1877, pp. 429–439, 2016.
different stages with a varying degree of information [4] K.-K. Hong and Y.-G. Kim, “The critical success factors for ERP
availability. Fifthly, the methods focus on large organisations, implementation: an organizational fit perspective,” Inf. Manag., vol. 40, no. 1,
pp. 25–40, 2002.
while limited support is provided for smaller enterprises.
[5] S. Mamoghli, V. Goepp, and V. Botta-Genoulaz, “An operational
Finally, the methods require a substantial amount of input ‘Risk Factor Driven’ approach for the mitigation and monitoring of the
data detailing enterprise business processes, which is difficult ‘Misalignment Risk’ in Enterprise Resource Planning projects,” Comput. Ind.,
vol. 70, pp. 1–12, 2015.
to provide in many real-life applications.
[6] P. Brereton, B. A. Kitchenham, D. Budgen, M. Turner, and M.
Khalil, “Lessons from applying the systematic literature review process within
IV. CONCLUSION the software engineering domain,” J. Syst. Softw., vol. 80, no. 4, pp. 571–583,
2007.
The literature review has aimed at identifying the existing
[7] B. Light, C. P. Holland, and K. Wills, “ERP and best of breed: A
methods of fit-gap analysis for ERP. The initial search has comparative analysis,” Bus. Process Manag. J., vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 216–224,
yielded 349 articles which have been reduced to 18 articles by Aug. 2001.
filtering and inspection of abstracts. The analysis has been [8] S. Parthasarathy and M. Daneva, “An approach to estimation of
restricted to papers published since 2010, which could be one degree of customization for ERP projects using prioritized requirements,” J.
of the main limitations of the review because the final results Syst. Softw., vol. 117, pp. 471–487, 2016.
indicate that the research on the fit-gap analysis is uniformly [9] L. Lessa, S. Negash, and M. Belachew, “From Failure to Successௗ:
distributed in time without the specific field of interest. Some Using Design-Reality Gap Analysis as a Mid-implementation Assessment
Tool for e-Government,” ICEGOV ’12, pp. 535–540, 2012.
of the relevant articles could have been published earlier.
[10] J. A. A. van Beijsterveld, “Misfits in ERP System Implementation:
The methods reviewed are mainly tailored for specific A Case Study of Dutch SMEs,” Universiteit van Tilburg, 2012.
application areas. The advantages and limitation of these [11] C. Soh, S. S. Kien, and J. Tay-Yap, “Enterprise resource planning:
methods have been identified and summarised in Section III. In Cultural Fits and Misfit: Is ERP A Universal Solution?,” Commun. ACM, vol.
43, no. 4, pp. 47–51, 2000.
general, the fit-gap methods should be made more flexible with
[12] H. Sun, W. Ni, and R. Lam, “A step-by-step performance
a lesser reliance on human expertise. They should be applicable assessment and improvement method for ERP implementation: Action case
for evaluation of different ERP systems. That would make studies in Chinese companies,” Comput. Ind., vol. 68, pp. 40–52, 2015.
them better suited to guide a choice among multiple ERP [13] K. Zachos, N. Maiden, and R. Howells-Morris, “Discovering web
systems. The methods should also be adaptable to the different services to improve requirements specifications: Does it help?,” in Lecture

000165
 I. Ancveire • Fit Gap Analysis Methods for ERP Systems
Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial
Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), 2008, vol. 5025 LNCS, pp.
168–182.
[14] T. R. Gulledge, “Erp Gap-Fit Analysis From a Business Process
Orientation,” Int. J. Serv. Stand., vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 339–348, 2006.
[15] J. H. Wu, S. S. Shin, and M. S. H. Heng, “A methodology for ERP
misfit analysis,” Inf. Manag., vol. 44, no. 8, pp. 666–680, 2007.
[16] I. Syamsuddin, “Novel gap analysis framework for cloud health
information systems,” J. Theor. Appl. Inf. Technol., vol. 87, no. 3, pp. 415–
421, 2016.
[17] P. A. Millet, “Toward a model-driven, alignment-oriented ERP
methodology,” Comput. Ind., vol. 64, no. 4, pp. 402–411, 2013.
[18] T. Shiang-yen, “A Framework for Classifying Misfits Between
Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Systems,” Asian Acad. Manag. J., vol.
16, no. 2, pp. 53–75, 2011.
[19] K. Rugchatjaroen, “Success of Electronic Government Project in
Bangkok Metropolis: An ITPOSMO Approach,” Int. J. Soc. Sci. Humanit.,
vol. 5, no. 9, pp. 783–787, 2015.
[20] R. Ladhari, “A review of twenty years of SERVQUAL research,”
Int. J. Qual. Serv. Sci., vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 172–198, Jul. 2009.
[21] W. Luo and D. M. Strong, “A framework for evaluating ERP
implementation choices,” IEEE Trans. Eng. Manag., vol. 51, no. 3, pp. 322–
333, 2004.
000166
[22] M. Rosemann, “Using reference models within the enterprise
resource planning lifecycle,” Aust. Account. Rev., vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 19–30,
2000.
[23] M. A. Rothenberger and M. Srite, “An Investigation of
Customization in ERP System Implementations,” IEEE Trans. Eng. Manag.,
vol. 56, no. 4, pp. 663–676, 2009.
[24] R. Sato, “Quick Iterative Process Prototypingௗ: A Bridge over the
Gap between ERP and Business Process Engineering,” in 4th Pacific Asia
Conference on Information Systems, 2000, pp. 615–622.
[25] M. Parhizkar, “A Framework for Impact Analysis of Post-
Implementation Enterprise Resource Planning Modifications,” no. ii, pp. 706–
714, 2016.
[26] S. Gürses, M. Seguran, and N. Zannone, “Requirements
engineering within a large-scale security-oriented research project: lessons
learned,” Requir. Eng., vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 43–66, 2013.
[27] J. A. A. van Beijsterveld and W. J. H. van Groenendaal, “Solving
misfits in ERP implementations by SMEs,” Inf. Syst. J., vol. 26, no. 4, pp.
369–393, Jul. 2016.
[28] C. Smartt, A. Register, and R. Wise, “Key Enablers for Leveraging
Non-Development Items in a System,” Procedia Comput. Sci., vol. 44, pp.
164–173, 2015.