Commercial off-the-shelf enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems have been adopted by large companies to support their inter- and intra-business processes. Midsize market firms are now investing in ERP systems too. However, research has indicated that about three quarters of attempted ERP projects turned out to be unsuccessful. A common problem encountered in adopting ERP software has been the issue of fit or alignment. This paper presents an ERP misfit analysis methodology, grounded on the task-technology fit theory and cognitive fit theory, for measuring misfits between ERP candidates and enterprise¡¦s requirements in ex-ante implementation. A decision support system prototype embedded the approach has been developed. A usability evaluation is performed on the prototype to demonstrate the approach. With this approach, organizations can more easily and systematically determine where the misfits are and the degree of misfits, thereby reducing the risks in implementing ERP systems. Our research contributes to the practical solution of the problem of misfit analysis.

Under de senaste åren har användning av digitala artefakter ökat vilket gett mindre plats till papper. Tidigare forskning illustrerar att läsning via papper är populärast utan någon indikation på att det faktiskt är bättre vad gäller inlärning. Syftet med arbetet är därför att se om det finns någon skillnad och likhet mellan bruksanvisningar på papper (fysiskt) eller skärm (digitalt). Studien grundar sig i teorin Cognitive fit theory förkortat CFT. Teorin har således modifierats till en egen modell där undersökning av valet mellan papper och skärm gjorts genom användarupplevelsen i inlärning (E-learning), tidigare erfarenheter, motivation och känslor. Dessa begrepp har uppkommit från CFT samt tidigare forskning och de har följaktligen följt med under hela processen. En till faktor som grundat sig i tidigare forskning och CFT är projektets frågeställning. Frågeställningen har undersökts och besvarats med hjälp av metoder såsom användartest, där användarna fått bygga ihop två ​LEGO-modeller av samma svårighetsgrad på de olika plattformarna skärm och papper. Användartestet kombinerades med Emotiv headset, som hjälpte till med mätning av hjärnans känslosystem. Rapporten visar även på projektets intervjuer, där deltagarna hade möjlighet att delge sina tankar om testet. Det slutgiltiga resultatet visade på att vissa stora faktorer spelar roll i valet mellan skärm och papper. Bland annat begrepp som erfarenhet, motivation och känslor samt jämförelser och likheter mellan de två plattformarna. Hälften av deltagarna ansåg att en fysisk bruksanvisning är ledande medan andra hälften ansåg den digitala bruksanvisningen som vanligast i och med tutorials och dylikt. Användartesterna gick som beräknat, en del motstridiga känslor uppkom dessvärre vilket kunde skapa större distraktioner hos deltagarna. En större omfattning om detta sker i rapportens olika kapitel. / In recent years, the use of digital artifacts has increased, giving less space to paper. Previous research illustrates that reading through paper is most popular without any indication that it is actually better with regard to learning. The purpose of the work is therefore to see if there is a difference and similarity between instructions on paper (physical) or screen (digital). The study is based on the theory Cognitive Fit theory shortened CFT. The theory has then been modified to an own model, where the choice between paper and screen has been made through the user experience in learning (E-learning), past experiences, motivation and emotions. These concepts have arisen from CFT as well as previous research and have consequently followed throughout the process. One factor to be found in earlier research and CFT is the issue of the project. The questionnaire has been investigated and answered using methods such as usability testing, where users were able to build two​ LEGO-models ​of the same difficulty on the various platforms screen and paper. The usability testing was combined with Emotiv headset, which helped to measure the brain's emotional system. Finally, interviews were conducted in order to be able to share the participants thoughts about the test. The final result showed that some major factors play a part in the choice between screen and paper. Among other things, concepts like experience, motivation and feelings, as well as comparisons and similarities between the two platforms. Half of the participants felt that a physical instruction manual was most common, while the other half considered the digital user manual as common with tutorials and so on. The user tests went as expected, some contradictory feelings emerged unfortunately which could create greater distractions among the participants. A greater extent about this is done in the various sections of the report.