How often does the technology not deliver the value that was expected? The challenge is to discover why does it fall short. Frequently the delivery people are blamed for not providing what was promised. The delivery people blame the users for not being clear on the requirement.
I expect that the underlying issue is related to change and how the change is being managed. Unfortunately mentioning change and management in the same sentence evokes a "change management process." Change management is treated as an element that is separate from the project as opposed to be integral to the process.
Most organizations realize how important the new system is and the changes required. However often the expectation is that the new system can be implemented as one big change. My experience is that approach gives the organization indigestion and maybe even constipation, if you will excuse the metaphor.
I believe that a phased introduction that delivers value and benefits quickly gives the organization confidence and momentum. The design of a phased introduction is more complex than the big bang and requires more from the project designer. The support of key people in the business is important for a phased introduction.
I recall a project where the key business users were reluctant to make a change to a new customer master file and the change required active and persistent support from their director to get them to make the change. He patiently met with the team weekly and made it clear he was going to persist until than moved to the new system. We ran into resistance at each phase but the director's support made it happen.
In the long term we have all seen the value from technology. However I think the pain of the change can be eliminated by the correct approach to the introduction.