WEAKNESSES OF INTEGRATING ERP, EAM AND BI INFORMATION SYSTEMS WITH LONG-TERM ASSET ACCOUNTING AND EFFECTIVE SOLUTIONS

Authors

  • Qahharov Zuhriddin Zafarbek Tashkent State University of Economics, Independent Researcher (DSc)

Keywords:

ERP integration, EAM, business intelligence, long-term asset accounting, IAS 16, oil and gas transport, strategic management accounting, vehicle fleet, data fragmentation, Uzbekistan.

Abstract

This study investigates the weaknesses of integrating Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP), Enterprise Asset Management (EAM) and Business Intelligence (BI) information systems with long-term asset accounting in the oil and gas transport sector of Uzbekistan. Drawing on a single-firm case study of "Sarbon-Neftegaz" Joint-Stock Company — a subsidiary of "Uzbekneftegaz" JSC operating a fleet of 134 vehicles — the paper identifies four systemic integration weaknesses: data fragmentation across isolated departmental platforms; the absence of a unified asset master register; IAS 16 [1]-non-compliant depreciation policy; and the lack of real-time BI dashboards for strategic decision-making. Using quantitative financial data from 2022–2024 alongside qualitative field observations, the study proposes a three-layer integration architecture that combines ERP financial modules, EAM maintenance and GPS-telematics feeds, and a BI analytical layer. The proposed framework is validated through a cost-benefit projection demonstrating potential annual savings of UZS 3,364 million (29.4% of total asset value), a 60% reduction in reporting lead time, and an increase in vehicle utilisation from 74.3% to 85.0%. The findings contribute to the sparse empirical literature on ERP–EAM–BI integration in developing-country extractive-sector subsidiaries and provide a replicable implementation roadmap for analogous organisations.

Downloads

Published

2026-06-11

Issue

Section

Articles

How to Cite

WEAKNESSES OF INTEGRATING ERP, EAM AND BI INFORMATION SYSTEMS WITH LONG-TERM ASSET ACCOUNTING AND EFFECTIVE SOLUTIONS. (2026). American Journal of Business Management, Economics and Banking, 49, 99-109. https://americanjournal.org/index.php/ajbmeb/article/view/3660