Cited by 685Technology Adoption and User BehaviourInformation Systems Theories and ImplementationERP Systems Implementation and Impact

Information System Success: Individual and Organizational Determinants

Open access
Sabherwal, Rajiv, Jeyaraj, Anand, Chowa, Charles·2006·Management Science

Abstract

Despite considerable empirical research, results on the relationships among constructs related to information system (IS) success, as well as the determinants of IS success, are often inconsistent. A comprehensive understanding of IS success thus remains elusive. In an attempt to address this situation, which may partly be due to the exclusion of potentially important constructs from prior parsimonious models of IS success, we present and test a comprehensive theoretical model. This model explains interrelationships among four constructs representing the success of a specific IS (user satisfaction, system use, perceived usefulness, and system quality), and the relationships of these IS success constructs with four user-related constructs (user experience with ISs, user training in ISs, user attitude toward ISs, and user participation in the development of the specific IS) and two constructs representing the context (top-management support for ISs and facilitating conditions for ISs). To test the model, we first used meta-analysis to compute a correlation matrix for the constructs in the model based on 612 findings from 121 studies published between 1980 and 2004, and then used this correlation matrix as input for a LISREL analysis of the model. Overall, we found excellent support for the theoretical model. The results underline the importance of user-related and contextual attributes in IS success and raise questions about some commonly believed relationships.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1287/mnsc.1060.0583

Cites

166 of 166 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Meta-analysis allows the application of statistical procedures for correcting sampling and measurement errors typically found in research studies and the inclusion of non-significant or inconsistent results for collective inference.

    “It allows the application of statistical procedures for correcting sampling and measurement errors typically found in research studies (Hunter and Schmidt 1990) and the inclusion of non-significant or inconsistent results for collective inference”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sabherwal, R., Jeyaraj, A., & Chowa, C.
Affiliations
  • University of Missouri–St. Louis (US)
  • Wright State University (US)
Venue
Management Science
Published
2006-12
Volume
52
Issue
12
Pages
1849-1864
ISSN
  • 0025-1909 (ISSN-L)
  • 1526-5501
OpenAlex
W2076658628
Cited by
685
References
166
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 27 · 2022: 34 · 2021: 41 · 2020: 38 · 2019: 30 · 2018: 30 · 2017: 45 · 2016: 36 · 2015: 63 · 2014: 48 · 2013: 45 · 2012: 42
FWCI
51.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Management Science (publishedVersion)
  • CORE Scholar (Wright State University) (submittedVersion)
  • Journal of Bioresource Management (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Technology Adoption and User Behaviour
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Information Systems Theories and Implementation
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management Information Systems › ERP Systems Implementation and Impact
Keywords
information system success, user satisfaction, system use, perceived usefulness, system quality, user experience, user training, user attitudes, user participation, top management support, facilitating conditions, theoretical model

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review