The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Information Systems Success Measurement
Abstract
Researchers and practitioners alike face a daunting challenge when evaluating the “success” of information systems. The purpose of this monograph is to deepen, researchers and practitioners, understanding of the complex nature of IS success measurement driven by the constantly changing role and use of information technology. This monograph covers the history of IS success measurement as well as recent trends and future expectations for IS success measurement. The monograph also identifies the critical success factors that drive information system success and provides measurement and evaluation guidance for practitioners. This comprehensive study of IS success measurement is designed to improve measurement practice among researchers and managers.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The DeLone and McLean Model of Information Systems Success: A Ten-Year Update
(2003) · Journal of Management Information Systems · doi:10.1080/07421222.2003.11045748 · Cited by 11,791
Self-citationInformation Systems Success: The Quest for the Dependent Variable
DeLone, W. H., & McLean, E. R. (1992) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.3.1.60 · Cited by 10,697
Self-citationThe productivity paradox of information technology
Brynjolfsson, E. (1993) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/163298.163309 · Cited by 2,604
Information Technology and Organizational Change: Causal Structure in Theory and Research
Markus, M. L., & Robey, D. (1988) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.34.5.583 · Cited by 2,108
Assessing the Validity of IS Success Models: An Empirical Test and Theoretical Analysis
Rai, A., Lang, S. S., & Welker, R. B. (2002) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.13.1.50.96 · Cited by 1,611
Public Value Management: A New Narrative for Networked Governance?
Stoker, G. (2006) · The American Review of Public Administration · doi:10.1177/0275074005282583 · Cited by 1,351
Information System Success: Individual and Organizational Determinants
Sabherwal, R., Jeyaraj, A., & Chowa, C. (2006) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.1060.0583 · Cited by 685
Cited by
Chao, C.-M. (2019) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01652 · Cited by 1,041
Alyoussef, I. Y. (2023) · Heliyon · doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e13751 · Cited by 181
Determinants of the management learning performance in ERP context
Costa, C. J., Aparicio, M., & Raposo, J. (2020) · Heliyon · doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e03689 · Cited by 55
“User satisfaction is the most popular success measure to assess IS success (DeLone and McLean, 2016).”
BackgroundDaradkeh, M. K. (2019) · Information Technology & People · doi:10.1108/itp-10-2017-0359 · Cited by 47
Metadata
- Authors
- DeLone, W. H., & McLean, E. R.
- Venue
- Foundations and Trends® in Information Systems
- Publisher
- Emerald
- Published
- 2016
- Volume
- 2
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 1-116
- ISSN
- 2331-1231 (ISSN-L)
- 2331-124X
- OpenAlex
- W2516486149
- Cited by
- 472
- References
- 7
- FWCI
- 49.94
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Information Systems Success Measurement. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1561/2900000005
- The paper
- DeLone, W. H., & McLean, E. R. (2016). Information Systems Success Measurement. Foundations and Trends® in Information Systems. https://doi.org/10.1561/2900000005
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
