Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 737

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 12 of the 12 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Re-conceptualizing Information System Success: The IS-Impact Measurement Model

Open access
Queensland University of Technology, Australia, Gable, Guy, Sedera, Darshana, Queensland University of Technology, Australia, Chan, Taizan, Queensland University of Technology, Australia·2008·Journal of the Association for Information Systems

Abstract

This paper re-conceptualizes ¡°information system success¡± as a formative, multidimensional index. Such a validated and widely accepted index would facilitate cumulative research on the impacts of IS, while at the same time provide a benchmark for organizations to track their IS performance. The proposed IS-Impact measurement model represents the stream of net benefits from an Information System (IS), to date and anticipated, as perceived by all key user groups. Model measures are formulated to be robust, economical, and simple, yielding results that are comparable across diverse systems and contexts, and from multiple user perspectives. The model includes four dimensions in two halves. The ¡°impact¡± half measures benefits to date, or Individual- and Organizational Impact; the ¡°quality¡± half uses System Quality and Information Quality as proxies for probable future impacts. Study findings evidence the necessity, additivity, and completeness of these four dimensions. The validation study involved three separate surveys, including exploratory and confirmatory phases preceded by an identification survey. Content analysis of 485 qualitative impacts cited by 137 respondents from across 27 Australian Government Agencies that implemented SAP Financials in the late 90s, identified salient dimensions and measures. The resultant a-priori model (¡°pool¡± of 37 measures) was operationalized in the subsequent specification survey, yielding 310 responses across the same 27 agencies. The confirmation survey, employing 27 validated measures from the specification survey, was next conducted in a large university that had implemented ORACLE Financials. Confirmatory analysis of the 153 responses provides further strong evidence of model validity.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.17705/1jais.00164

Cites

12 of 12 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 12 references

Cited by

See all 737

Metadata

Authors
Queensland University of Technology, A., Gable, G., Sedera, D., Queensland University of Technology, A., Chan, T., & Queensland University of Technology, A.
Venue
Journal of the Association for Information Systems
Published
2008-07
Volume
9
Issue
7
Pages
377-408
ISSN
1536-9323 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1557168211
Cited by
737
References
12
FWCI
75.03
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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: Re-conceptualizing Information System Success: The IS-Impact Measurement Model. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.17705/1jais.00164
The paper
Queensland University of Technology, A., Gable, G., Sedera, D., Queensland University of Technology, A., Chan, T., & Queensland University of Technology, A. (2008). Re-conceptualizing Information System Success: The IS-Impact Measurement Model. Journal of the Association for Information Systems. https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00164

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.