Enterprise Resource Planning Systems for Health, Safety, and Environment Management: Analyzing Critical Success Factors
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
2.1. Enhancing Workplace Safety Through ERP Systems
2.2. Leveraging ERP Systems for Workplace Health Management
2.3. Optimizing Environmental Sustainability
2.4. Hybrid HSE Management
2.5. Strengthening Employee Engagement and Training for Effective HSE Management
2.6. Leveraging Technology for Enhanced HSE Management
2.7. Strengthening Compliance and Regulatory Adherence
2.8. Enhancing Incident Response Efficiency
2.9. Leveraging ERP Systems to Enhance Workplace Well-Being and Satisfaction
2.10. Enhancing Sustainability Through ERP-Driven Environmental Management
2.11. Strengthening Organizational Culture and Communication
2.12. Risk Management and Mitigation Strategies
2.13. Strengthening Data Security and Privacy in ERP-Integrated HSE Systems
2.14. Conclusions of the Literature Review
3. Methodology
- Validate their responses [62];
- Ensure independent judgments;
- Minimize the risk of collective bias [63].
- ne: Number of experts in the subject considered “essential to the study”.
- N: The total number of experts in the subject.
- Participant Background: This section will collect demographic and professional information to ensure the diversity and relevance of respondents. These questions covered the years of experience respondents had in HSE and ERP systems, their sector of employment (such as government, healthcare, oil and gas, or construction), their current role and level of responsibility, and their prior experience with ERP-HSE integration. This information helped contextualize the responses and allowed for a more nuanced analysis of how professional background influences perceptions of ERP adoption in HSE management.
- Factor Ranking: To ensure a structured and reliable evaluation of factor significance, participants were asked to rate each validated factor on a five-point Likert scale based on its perceived importance in influencing HSE outcomes within the UAE’s public sector. The Likert scale ranged from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important), allowing for a quantitative assessment of stakeholder priorities. The survey was carefully designed to align with the key factors identified in the literature review and validated through expert interviews, ensuring that respondents provided informed and relevant insights. Additionally, the survey included clear instructions and examples to enhance respondent understanding and consistency in rating. For ethical compliance, the study received Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval from the American University of Sharjah, confirming that all data collection procedures adhered to ethical research standards, including informed consent, voluntary participation, and data confidentiality.
- W: Weighting assigned by each respondent;
- A: Value of the highest weight (5 for this study);
- n5: Number of respondents who strongly agree;
- n4: Number of respondents who agree;
- n3: Number of respondents who are neutral;
- n2: Number of respondents who disagree;
- n1: Number of respondents who strongly disagree;
- N: Total number of responses.
4. Results
4.1. Expert Interviews and Factor Validation
4.2. Survey Analysis and Factor Ranking
- “Incident Reporting and Notification Mechanisms” ranked as high as eight (RI = 0.710204).
- “Tracking of Incident Resolution and Analysis” ranked at 12 (RI = 0.665306).
- “Time to Mobilize Response Teams” ranked as low as 20 (RI = 0.595918).
- Organizations may prioritize incident reporting and tracking over mobilization speed, as preventative measures and real-time reporting are seen as more impactful than post-incident responses.
- The time to mobilize response teams can be influenced by factors outside ERP systems, such as external emergency services, organizational hierarchy, and resource availability. Unlike automated reporting, which ERP systems directly control, response mobilization often depends on external logistics and coordination efforts, making it less reliant on ERP functionalities.
- In some sectors, such as manufacturing and construction, response time may be more critical due to high-risk environments. However, in office-based settings, the emphasis may be on incident tracking and compliance rather than immediate physical response.
- Safety remains the top priority in ERP-driven HSE management, with accident reduction and risk mitigation being the most valued functions.
- Technology utilization is a key driver of ERP adoption, particularly in areas involving data analytics and automated reporting.
- Training, accessibility, and employee engagement factors significantly influence ERP effectiveness, reinforcing the need for user-friendly system designs.
- Incident response priorities vary, with real-time reporting being highly valued, while response team mobilization is deprioritized due to external dependencies.
- Compliance and risk management factors are ranked lower, suggesting that organizations focus more on operational safety and efficiency rather than long-term strategic risk planning.
5. Conclusions and Recommendations
- Integration with legacy systems: Many public sector organizations rely on outdated safety and compliance platforms, making ERP implementation complex and resource-intensive. Ensuring seamless data migration and interoperability is critical.
- User resistance and training gaps: Employees often resist ERP adoption due to unfamiliarity with digital tools. Comprehensive training programs and user-friendly ERP interfaces are essential to overcoming this challenge.
- Customization and compliance adaptation: ERP systems must be customized to align with UAE’s unique regulatory frameworks, which can increase costs and implementation timelines.
- Cybersecurity risks: Given the sensitive nature of HSE data, ERP platforms must incorporate robust cybersecurity measures to prevent unauthorized access, data breaches, and compliance violations.
- Comparative analysis across industries: Evaluating ERP adoption in different sectors (e.g., healthcare, construction, aviation) to understand sector-specific challenges and best practices.
- The long-term impact of ERP on HSE outcomes: Conducting longitudinal studies to assess how ERP influences safety performance, regulatory compliance, and workforce behavior over time.
- The role of AI and IoT in ERP-integrated HSE systems: Investigating how emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence, IoT-enabled sensors, and predictive analytics enhance ERP-based HSE risk management.
- Behavioral and organizational factors in ERP adoption: Examining the role of organizational culture, leadership support, and employee attitudes in shaping ERP adoption success.
- Integration of ERP and blockchain technology for HSE management: Exploring the potential of blockchain in enhancing data security, transparency, and traceability in ERP-driven HSE systems. Recent studies, such as Su et al. [67], highlight how blockchain can support resilient safety investment and risk management, particularly in high-risk industries.
- Addressing technical and cultural barriers in ERP-HSE implementation: Investigating key bottlenecks such as interoperability issues, user resistance, and organizational adaptation challenges that may hinder ERP effectiveness in HSE environments.
- Adopt ERP systems with real-time safety tracking and AI-driven risk assessment tools
- ○
- Implement predictive analytics within ERP to identify high-risk areas before incidents occur.
- ○
- Integrate IoT-enabled sensors to continuously monitor workplace hazards and automate safety alerts.
- ○
- Utilize machine learning algorithms to analyze historical safety data and suggest corrective measures.
- Invest in mobile-enabled ERP platforms for remote access to compliance data, training materials, and incident reporting systems
- ○
- Deploy mobile applications that allow employees to submit safety reports in real-time from any location.
- ○
- Ensure ERP dashboards are accessible across multiple devices for instant regulatory compliance checks.
- ○
- Integrate mobile push notifications for urgent HSE updates and compliance reminders.
- Strengthen employee engagement through ERP-integrated training modules and feedback loops
- ○
- Develop interactive ERP-based training modules that track employee participation and performance.
- ○
- Implement real-time feedback mechanisms within the ERP system to assess the effectiveness of safety training.
- Ensure ERP systems are adaptable to evolving HSE regulations and industry-specific compliance requirements
- ○
- Establish automated regulatory tracking within the ERP to flag policy changes and ensure compliance updates.
- ○
- Customize ERP modules for sector-specific HSE requirements (e.g., construction, healthcare, and oil and gas).
- ○
- Enable dynamic workflows within the ERP to support region-specific legal and procedural compliance updates.
- Address cybersecurity risks by implementing multi-layered data security protocols for HSE-sensitive information
- ○
- Enforce role-based access control to limit sensitive HSE data exposure.
- ○
- Use blockchain technology for secure, tamper-proof HSE records management.
- ○
- Conduct regular cybersecurity audits to assess vulnerabilities in ERP security frameworks.
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Parker, R.; Bradley, L. Organisational culture in the public sector: Evidence from six organisations. Int. J. Public Sect. Manag. 2000, 13, 125–141. [Google Scholar]
- Sadeghi, S. Implementation of HSE culture using CRM techniques in the construction industry. Res. Sq. 2022, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Manu, P.; Mahamadu, A.-M.; Phung, V.M.; Nguyen, T.T.; Ath, C.; Heng, A.Y.T.; Kit, S.C. Health and safety management practices of contractors in South East Asia: A multi country study of Cambodia, Vietnam, and Malaysia. Saf. Sci. 2018, 107, 188–201. [Google Scholar]
- Pachiyannakis, A.K. Organizational and environmental factors influencing an HSE culture. In Proceedings of the SPE International Conference and Exhibition on Health, Safety, Environment, and Sustainability, Perth, Australia, 11–13 September 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Almazrouei, M.; Khalid, K.; Abdallah, S.; Davidson, R. Assessing the health, safety, and environment culture in the United Arab Emirates oil and gas industry. J. Eng. Des. Technol. 2020, 18, 495–512. [Google Scholar]
- Høivik, D. HSE and culture in the petroleum industry in norway. In Proceedings of the SPE International Conference and Exhibition on Health, Safety, Environment, and Sustainability, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 12–14 April 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Buell, R.S. Creating a culture to deliver sustainable HSE performance. SPE Proj. Facil. Constr. 2006, 1, 1–8. [Google Scholar]
- Isa, M.F.M.; Ugheoke, S.O.; Noor, W.S.W.M. The influence of organizational culture on employees’ performance: Evidence from Oman. J. Entrep. Bus. 2016, 4, 1–12. [Google Scholar]
- Gray, D.; Jones, K. The resilience and wellbeing of public sector leaders. Int. J. Public Leadersh. 2018, 14, 138–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Harrison, G.L.; Baird, K.M. The organizational culture of public sector organizations in Australia. Aust. J. Manag. 2015, 40, 613–629. [Google Scholar]
- Nur, D.P.; Putra, A.A. Enterprise resource planning and firm value: Case of oil and gas firm in indonesian stock exchange. Int. J. Energy Econ. Policy 2020, 10, 185–189. [Google Scholar]
- Andersson, B. An assessment of the effects of enterprise resource planning adoption in SMEs. J. Enterp. Bus. Intell. 2022, 2, 66–76. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, C.; Xu, L.; Liu, X.; Qin, X. ERP research, development and implementation in China: An overview. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2005, 43, 3915–3932. [Google Scholar]
- MEid, I.M.; Abbas, H.I. User adaptation and ERP benefits: Moderation analysis of user experience with ERP. Kybernetes 2017, 46, 530–549. [Google Scholar]
- Weli, W. The accountant satisfaction in using ERP systems. CommIT (Commun. Inf. Technol.) J. 2018, 12, 27–34. [Google Scholar]
- Alizadeh, S.S.; Mortazavi, S.B.; Sepehri, M.M. Analysis of occupational accident fatalities and injuries among male group in Iran between 2008 and 2012. Iran. Red Crescent Med. J. 2015, 17, e18976. [Google Scholar]
- Hajipour, V.; Amouzegar, H.; Gharaei, A.; Abarghoei, M.S.G.; Ghajari, S. An integrated process-based HSE management system: A case study. Saf. Sci. 2021, 133, 104993. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kunduru, A. Healthcare ERP Project Success: It’s all About Avoiding Missteps. Cent. Asian J. Theor. Appl. Sci. 2023, 4, 130–134. [Google Scholar]
- Amado, A.; Belfo, F.P. Maintenance and Support Model within the ERP Systems Lifecycle: Action Research in an Implementer Company. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2021, 181, 580–588. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chatzoglou, P.; Chatzoudes, D.; Apostolopoulou, G. Antecedents and outcomes of ERP implementation success. In Proceedings of the 2016 Federated Conference on Computer Science and Information Systems (FedCSIS), Gdansk, Poland, 11–14 September 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Olutola, T.; Balen, J.; Lotisa, V.; Johnima, A.; Browndi, I. Algebraic Multigrid and Cloud Enterprise Resource Planning System: A Powerful Combination for Business Efficiency. Asian J. Basic Appl. Sci. 2023, 10, 197–202. [Google Scholar]
- Langenwalter, G.A. Enterprise Resources Planning and Beyond: Integrating Your Entire Organization; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Faccia, A.; Petratos, P. Blockchain, Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) and Accounting Information Systems (AIS): Research on e-Procurement and System Integration. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 6792. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Malik, M.O.; Khan, N. Analysis of ERP implementation to develop a strategy for its success in developing countries. Prod. Plan. Control 2021, 32, 1020–1035. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Al Qattan, F.; Alam, M.A.; Haque, M.R. Kuwait oil company devised a customized & user friendly web based incident investigation module through HSE live. In Proceedings of the SPE Kuwait Oil and Gas Show and Conference, Mishref, Kuwait, 7–10 October 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Balić, A.; Turulja, L.; Kuloglija, E.; Pejić-Bach, M. ERP Quality and the Organizational Performance: Technical Characteristics vs. Information and Service. Information 2022, 13, 474. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alaskari, O.; Pinedo-Cuenca, R.; Ahmad, M.M. Framework for implementation of Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Systems in Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs): A Case Study. Procedia Manuf. 2021, 55, 424–430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- AlMuhayfith, S.; Shaiti, H. The Impact of Enterprise Resource Planning on Business Performance: With the Discussion on Its Relationship with Open Innovation. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2020, 6, 87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Adamopoulos, I.P.; Bardavouras, A.N.; Syrou, N.F. Occupational safety, policy, and management in public health organizations and services. Eur. J. Environ. Public Health 2023, 7, em0122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kenge, R.; Khan, Z. A Research Study on the ERP System Implementation and Current Trends in ERP. Shanlax Int. J. Manag. 2020, 8, 34–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bialas, C.; Bechtsis, D.; Aivazidou, E.; Achillas, C.; Aidonis, D. Digitalization of the Healthcare Supply Chain through the Adoption of Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Systems in Hospitals: An Empirical Study on Influencing Factors and Cost Performance. Sustainability 2023, 15, 3163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kumar, N.; Krieger, G. Linking longitudinal morbidity and mortality trends in host communities to workplace disease control efforts in the PNG LNG project. In Proceedings of the SPE International Conference and Exhibition on Health, Safety, Environment, and Sustainability, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, 17 April 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Karatas, M.; Eriskin, L.; Deveci, M.; Pamucar, D.; Garg, H. Big Data for Healthcare Industry 4.0: Applications, challenges and future perspectives. Expert Syst. Appl. 2022, 200, 116912. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chofreh, A.G.; Goni, F.A.; Klemeš, J.J.; Malik, M.N.; Khan, H.H. Development of guidelines for the implementation of sustainable enterprise resource planning systems. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 244, 118655. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Peuscher, W.T.; Clark, D.D.; Graeb-Konneker, S.E.; de Rijke, R. Changing Gear—The need for a different way of HSSE learning. In Proceedings of the SPE International Conference and Exhibition on Health, Safety, Environment, and Sustainability, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, 2–4 April 2006. [Google Scholar]
- Abukari, A.; Bankas, E.; Iddrisu, M. An Enhanced Error Detection and Correction Scheme for Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Data Storage. J. Adv. Math. Comput. Sci. 2021, 36, 72–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hajra, H.; Jayalakshmi, G. Investigating innovative social technology for elevating employee well-being in the business context. In Data-Driven Intelligent Business Sustainability; IGI Global: Hershey, PA, USA, 2024. [Google Scholar]
- Norlander, A. Hybrid Cognitive Capabilities in EDGE Operations. In Proceedings of the Human Interaction & Emerging Technologies (IHIET 2023): Artificial Intelligence & Future Applications, Nice, France, 21–23 April 2023. [Google Scholar]
- Putra, D.G.; Rahayu, R.; Putri, A. The Influence of Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Implementation System on Company Performance Mediated by Organizational Capabilities. J. Account. Invest. 2021, 22, 221–241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Poyyara, R.; George, S.; Patil, P.; Konale, S. Circumventing human error by integrating HSE in system design. In Proceedings of the International Petroleum Technology Conference, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 10–12 December 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Neill, M.; Lehmann, S. Closing the operational assurance loop to establish line of sight on cumulative risk and improve safety performance. In Proceedings of the SPE Health, Safety, Security, Environment, & Social Responsibility Conference, Galveston, TX, USA, 18–20 March 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Benson, C.; Obasi, I.C.; Akinwande, D.V.; Ile, C. The impact of interventions on health, safety and environment in the process industry. Heliyon 2024, 10, e23604. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Babu, M.S.P.; Sastry, S.H. Big data and predictive analytics in ERP systems for automating decision making process. In Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE 5th International Conference on Software Engineering and Service Science, Beijing, China, 27–29 June 2014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Glowalla, P.; Sunyaev, A. ERP system fit—An explorative task and data quality perspective. J. Enterp. Inf. Manag. 2014, 27, 668–686. [Google Scholar]
- Park, K.O. The relationship between BPR strategy and change management for the sustainable implementation of ERP: An information orientation perspective. Sustainability 2018, 10, 3080. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shin, I.; Lee, M.; Park, W. Implementation of the continuous auditing system in the ERP-based environment. Manag. Audit. J. 2013, 28, 592–627. [Google Scholar]
- Slutzman, J.E.; Bockius, H.; Gordon, I.O.; Greene, H.C.; Hsu, S.; Huang, Y.; Lam, M.H.; Roberts, T.; Thiel, C.L. Waste audits in healthcare: A systematic review and description of best practices. Waste Manag. Res. 2023, 41, 3–17. [Google Scholar]
- Zara, J.; Nordin, S.M.; Isha, A.S.N. Influence of communication determinants on safety commitment in a high-risk workplace: A systematic literature review of four communication dimensions. Front. Public Health 2023, 11, 1225995. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Goekcimen, K.; Schwendimann, R.; Pfeiffer, Y.; Mohr, G.M.; Jaeger, C.M.; Mueller, S. Addressing patient safety hazards using critical incident reporting in hospitals: A systematic review. J. Patient Saf. 2023, 19, e1–e8. [Google Scholar]
- Sherman, J.D.; Thiel, C.; MacNeill, A.; Eckelman, M.J.; Dubrow, R.; Hopf, H.; Lagasse, R.; Bialowitz, J.; Costello, A.; Forbes, M.; et al. The Green Print: Advancement of Environmental Sustainability in Healthcare. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2020, 161, 104882. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Churruca, K.; Ellis, L.A.; Pomare, C.; Hogden, A.; Bierbaum, M.; Long, J.C.; Olekalns, A.; Braithwaite, J. Dimensions of safety culture: A systematic review of quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods for assessing safety culture in hospitals. BMJ Open 2021, 11, e043982. [Google Scholar]
- Azyabi, A.; Karwowski, W.; Davahli, M.R. Assessing Patient Safety Culture in Hospital Settings. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 2466. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Melville, N.P. Environmental Sustainability 2.0: Empirical Analysis of Environmental ERP Implementation. 2012. Available online: https://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/91283 (accessed on 23 March 2025).
- Rasanjali, W.A.; Mendis, A.; Perera, B.; Disaratna, V. Implementing enterprise resource planning for lean waste minimisation: Challenges and proposed strategies. Smart Sustain. Built Environ. 2024, 13, 330–353. [Google Scholar]
- Husaini, B.; Sugiarto, S.; Rahmanand, S.; Oktari, R.S. Assessing hospital disaster preparedness: A scoping review of available tools. Narra J. 2023, 3, e210. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Asadi, S.; Karan, E. On the development of a stochastic model to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions in building and transportation sectors. In Proceedings of the Qatar Foundation Annual Research Conference Proceedings, Doha, Qatar, 22–23 March 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Aloini, D.; Dulmin, R.; Mininno, V. Risk assessment in ERP projects. Inf. Syst. 2012, 37, 183–199. [Google Scholar]
- Lopez, C.; Salmeron, J.L. Dynamic risks modelling in ERP maintenance projects with FCM. Inf. Sci. 2014, 256, 25–45. [Google Scholar]
- Antonova, R. ERP security, audit and process improvement. In Proceedings of the Smart Technologies and Innovation for a Sustainable Future: Proceedings of the 1st American University in the Emirates International Research Conference, Dubai, United Arab Emirates, 15–16 November 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Saxena, N.; Khan, M. Security and Privacy in IoT Smart Healthcare. IEEE Internet Comput. 2021, 25, 37–48. [Google Scholar]
- Kaushik, S. Securing ERP cyber systems by preventing holistic industrial intrusion. In Security Incidents & Response Against Cyber Attacks; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2021; pp. 97–112. [Google Scholar]
- Humphrey-Murto, S.; de Wit, M. The Delphi method—More research please. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 2018, 106, 136–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fink-Hafner, D.; Dagen, T.; Doušak, M.; Novak, M. Delphi Method: Strengths and Weaknesses. Adv. Methodol. Stat. 2019, 16, 1–19. [Google Scholar]
- Lawshe, C.H. A Quantitative Approach to Content Validity. Person. Psychol. 1975, 28, 563–575. [Google Scholar]
- Rooshdi, R.R.R.M.; Abd Majid, M.Z.; Sahamir, S.R.; Adillah Ismail, N.A. Relative importance index of sustainable design and construction activities criteria for green highway. Chem. Eng. Trans. 2018, 63, 151–156. [Google Scholar]
- Das, D.K. A perspective for transforming central areas of South African cities into great places. Int. J. Urban Sustain. Dev. 2022, 14, 441–459. [Google Scholar]
- Su, C.; Deng, J.; Li, X.; Huang, W.; Wang, C.; Wang, X. Investment in enhancing resilience safety of chemical parks under blockchain technology: From the perspective of dynamic reward and punishment mechanisms. J. Loss Prev. Process Ind. 2025, 94, 105523. [Google Scholar]
Factor | Indicator | References |
---|---|---|
Safety | SF1: Number of incidents | [23] |
SF2: Number of fatality | [24] | |
SF3: Lost time injury frequency rate | [28] | |
SF4: Mean time between two incidents | [29] | |
SF5: Number of identified safety hazards | [30,32] | |
SF6: Fatality-related failure rate | [28,30] | |
SF7: Frequencies of fatal incident | [28] | |
Health | HL1: Number of obese employees | [18] |
HL2: Number of employees engaged in health screening | [35] | |
HL3: Prevalence rate of occupational diseases | [18,35] | |
HL4: Total recordable occupational illness frequency | [35] | |
Environment | EV1: Green space development percentage index | [31] |
EV2: Greenhouse gas emissions index | [24] | |
EV3: Pollutant standard Index | [30] | |
EV4: Gas water electricity consumption index | [30] | |
Hybrid | HD1: Operational cost efficiency | [23] |
HD2: Cost of capita per employee | [34] | |
HD3: Cost of capita per ton of final product | [34] | |
HD4: Human capital productivity | [29] | |
Engagement and Training | ET1: HSE training completion and certification tracking | [22] |
ET2: Accessibility and update frequency of HSE training materials | [17] | |
ET3: Employee feedback on training programs | [30] | |
ET4: Integration of HSE training with employee performance assessments | [23] | |
Technology Utilization | TU1: Real-time HSE monitoring and alert systems | [42] |
TU2: Data analytics for HSE trend analysis | [43] | |
TU3: Mobile access to HSE tools and information | [29] | |
TU4: Automation of HSE reporting and compliance | [44] | |
Compliance and Regulatory | CR1: Regulatory change management and notification | [34,45] |
CR2: Document control for compliance evidence | [34,45] | |
CR3: Audit trail capabilities for HSE activities | [46] | |
CR4: Compliance reporting and submission tools | [34,46] | |
Incident Response Time | IRT1: Incident reporting and notification mechanisms | [24] |
IRT2: Time to mobilize response teams | [34] | |
IRT3: Tracking of incident resolution and analysis | [34] | |
IRT4: Post-incident review and learning integration | [34] | |
Employee Well-being and Satisfaction | EWS1: Health and wellness program management | [31] |
EWS2: Employee satisfaction surveys regarding HSE | [48] | |
EWS3: Mechanisms for reporting and addressing HSE concerns | [49] | |
EWS4: Analysis of workplace environment improvements | [31] | |
Sustainability | SI1: Environmental impact assessment tools | [17] |
SI2: Tracking of sustainability initiatives and outcomes | [53,54] | |
SI3: Resource usage and efficiency analytics | [53] | |
SI4: Waste management and reduction tracking | [54] | |
Organizational Culture and Communication | OCC1: Distribution of HSE policies and updates | [54] |
OCC2: Platforms for employee feedback on HSE matters | [54] | |
OCC3: Recognition and rewards for HSE contributions | [54] | |
OCC4: Cross-functional HSE collaboration and initiatives | [54] | |
Risk Management and Mitigation Strategies | RMM1: Risk assessment and prioritization framework | [57,58] |
RMM2: Incident and near-miss analysis tools | [57,58] | |
RMM3: Emergency preparedness and response planning | [57,58] | |
RMM4: Continuous risk management and improvement feedback | [57,58] | |
Data Security and Privacy | DSP1: Data encryption and security protocols | [59,60] |
DSP2: Access controls and user authentication | [59] | |
DSP3: Compliance with data protection laws | [61] |
Expert # | Job Title | Sector | Total Years of Experience | Experience in ERP Systems | Experience with HSE |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Head of HSE section | Facilities and Infrastructure | 13 | 5 | 12 |
2 | Senior Consultant in HSE | Public Safety | 19 | 8 | 15 |
3 | Senior Manager of HSE Unit | Oil and Gas | 19 | 4 | 19 |
4 | Director of Operations | Airport Operation/Aviation | 14 | 3 | 14 |
5 | Senior Expert | Oil and Gas | 16 | 8 | 4 |
Factor | Code | Indicator | CVR Value |
---|---|---|---|
Safety | SF1 | Number of incidents | 1 |
SF2 | Number of fatality | 1 | |
SF3 | Lost time injury frequency rate | 1 | |
SF6 | Fatality-related failure rate | 1 | |
SF7 | Frequencies of fatal incident | 1 | |
Health | HL 3 | Prevalence rate of occupational diseases | 1 |
Engagement and Training | ET2 | Accessibility and update frequency of HSE training materials | 1 |
ET3 | Employee feedback on training programs | 1 | |
Technology Utilization | TU2 | Data analytics for HSE trend analysis | 1 |
TU3 | Mobile access to HSE tools and information | 1 | |
TU4 | Automation of HSE reporting and compliance | 1 | |
Compliance and Regulatory | CR1 | Regulatory change management and notification | 1 |
CR2 | Document control for compliance evidence | 1 | |
CR4 | Compliance reporting and submission tools | 1 | |
Incident Response Time | IRT1 | Incident reporting and notification mechanisms | 1 |
IRT2 | Time to mobilize response teams | 1 | |
IRT3 | Tracking of incident resolution and analysis | 1 | |
Risk Management and Mitigation Strategies | RMM1 | Risk assessment and prioritization framework | 1 |
RMM2 | Incident and near-miss analysis tools | 1 | |
RMM3 | Emergency preparedness and response planning | 1 | |
Performance Monitoring and Continuous Improvement | PMCI1 | Performance dashboard and reporting tools | 1 |
PMCI3 | Mechanisms for implementing corrective actions | 1 |
Category | Count | Category | Count |
---|---|---|---|
Education Level | Work Experience | ||
Bachelor’s degree | 29 | <1 | 2 |
High school diploma | 3 | 1–5 | 13 |
Master’s degree | 16 | 5–10 | 22 |
PhD or Doctorate degree | 1 | 10–20 | 10 |
>20 | 2 | ||
Job title | Experience in ERP | ||
Operation | 7 | No experience | 4 |
Administrative job | 4 | <1 | 9 |
Engineer | 23 | 1–5 | 19 |
HSE Officer | 12 | 5–10 | 14 |
Other | 3 | 10–20 | 2 |
>20 | 1 | ||
Training In ERP | Work in Public Sector | ||
No Training | 5 | Currently Working | 42 |
Basic Training from work | 26 | Used to Work | 6 |
Class or Workshop in ERP | 9 | Collaborated on Some Projects | 1 |
Certificate in ERP | 6 | ||
Diploma in ERP | 3 | ||
Sector | Organization Size | ||
Aviation | 8 | <250 | 4 |
Construction | 3 | 250–500 | 4 |
Health and Safety | 8 | 500–1000 | 12 |
Industrial | 5 | 1000–2000 | 14 |
Oil and Gas | 7 | >2000 | 15 |
Space | 1 | ||
Tech | 1 | ||
Transportation | 5 | ||
Utilities/Service | 11 |
Rank | Factor | Indicator | RI Value |
---|---|---|---|
1 | Safety | Number of incidents | 0.926531 |
2 | Safety | Number of fatality | 0.906122 |
3 | Safety | Frequencies of fatal incident | 0.865306 |
4 | Safety | Lost time injury frequency rate | 0.836735 |
5 | Safety | Fatality-related failure rate | 0.812245 |
6 | Technology Utilization | Data analytics for HSE trend analysis | 0.742857 |
7 | Technology Utilization | Automation of HSE reporting and compliance | 0.726531 |
8 | Incident Response Time | Incident reporting and notification mechanisms | 0.710204 |
9 | Engagement and Training | Accessibility and update frequency of HSE training materials | 0.693878 |
10 | Technology Utilization | Mobile access to HSE tools and information | 0.689796 |
11 | Engagement and Training | Employee feedback on training programs | 0.685714 |
12 | Incident Response Time | Tracking of incident resolution and analysis | 0.665306 |
13 | Performance Monitoring and Continuous Improvement | Mechanisms for implementing corrective actions | 0.64898 |
14 | Performance Monitoring and Continuous Improvement | Performance dashboard and reporting tools | 0.644898 |
15 | Health | Prevalence rate of occupational diseases | 0.632653 |
16 | Compliance and Regulatory | Regulatory change management and notification | 0.632653 |
17 | Compliance and Regulatory | Document control for compliance evidence | 0.612245 |
18 | Risk Management and Mitigation Strategies | Incident and near-miss analysis tools | 0.604082 |
19 | Compliance and Regulatory | Compliance reporting and submission tools | 0.595918 |
20 | Incident Response Time | Time to mobilize response teams | 0.595918 |
21 | Risk Management and Mitigation Strategies | Risk assessment and prioritization framework | 0.587755 |
22 | Risk Management and Mitigation Strategies | Emergency preparedness and response planning | 0.587755 |
Rank | Factor | RI AVG |
---|---|---|
1 | Safety | 0.869388 |
2 | Technology Utilization | 0.719728 |
3 | Engagement and Training | 0.689796 |
4 | Incident Response Time | 0.657143 |
5 | Performance Monitoring and Continuous Improvement | 0.646939 |
6 | Health | 0.632653 |
7 | Compliance and Regulatory | 0.613605 |
8 | Risk Management and Mitigation Strategies | 0.593197 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
AlMarri, M.; Al-Ali, M.; Alzarooni, M.; AlTeneiji, A.; Al-Ali, K.; Bahroun, Z. Enterprise Resource Planning Systems for Health, Safety, and Environment Management: Analyzing Critical Success Factors. Sustainability 2025, 17, 2947. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17072947
AlMarri M, Al-Ali M, Alzarooni M, AlTeneiji A, Al-Ali K, Bahroun Z. Enterprise Resource Planning Systems for Health, Safety, and Environment Management: Analyzing Critical Success Factors. Sustainability. 2025; 17(7):2947. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17072947
Chicago/Turabian StyleAlMarri, Mohamed, Mohamed Al-Ali, Mohamed Alzarooni, Anas AlTeneiji, Khalid Al-Ali, and Zied Bahroun. 2025. "Enterprise Resource Planning Systems for Health, Safety, and Environment Management: Analyzing Critical Success Factors" Sustainability 17, no. 7: 2947. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17072947
APA StyleAlMarri, M., Al-Ali, M., Alzarooni, M., AlTeneiji, A., Al-Ali, K., & Bahroun, Z. (2025). Enterprise Resource Planning Systems for Health, Safety, and Environment Management: Analyzing Critical Success Factors. Sustainability, 17(7), 2947. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17072947