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 accessAbstract
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.
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
Information 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
A QUANTITATIVE APPROACH TO CONTENT VALIDITY1
LAWSHE, C. H. (1975) · Personnel Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1975.tb01393.x · Cited by 7,313
Determination and Quantification Of Content Validity
LYNN, M. R. (1986) · Nursing Research · doi:10.1097/00006199-198611000-00017 · Cited by 6,775
Practical issues in structural modeling
BENTLER, P. M., & CHOU, C.-P. (1987) · Sociological Methods & Research · doi:10.1177/0049124187016001004 · Cited by 5,804
The antecedents and consequences of customer satisfaction for firms
Anderson, E. W., & Sullivan, M. W. (1993) · Marketing Science · doi:10.1287/mksc.12.2.125 · Cited by 4,610
Diamantopoulos, A., & Siguaw, J. A. (2006) · British Journal of Management · doi:10.1111/j.1467-8551.2006.00500.x · Cited by 3,410 · cited 1×
“Following the guidelines of Diamantopoulos and Siguaw (2006) and Diamantopoulos and Winklhofer (2001), we first test for multi-collinearity among the measures.”
MethodThe Nature of Theory in Information Systems1
Gregor, S. (2006) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/25148742 · Cited by 3,306 · cited 1×
“The model does not purport (is not concerned with) any causality among the dimensions; rather, akin to analytic theory27 (Gregor, 2006), the constructs are posited to be formative dimensions of the multidimensional concept—IS-Impact wherein the dimensions have a causal relationship with the…”
BackgroundThe productivity paradox of information technology
Brynjolfsson, E. (1993) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/163298.163309 · Cited by 2,604
Representing and Testing Organizational Theories: A Holistic Construal
Bagozzi, R. P., & Phillips, L. W. (1982) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2392322 · Cited by 2,064
Cited by
Research on information systems failures and successes: Status update and future directions
Dwivedi, Y. K., Wastell, D., Laumer, S., Henriksen, H. Z., Myers, M. D., Bunker, D., Elbanna, A., Ravishankar, M. N., & Srivastava, S. C. (2015) · Information Systems Frontiers · doi:10.1007/s10796-014-9500-y · Cited by 448
Exploring the role of customer relationship management (CRM) systems in customer knowledge creation
Khodakarami, F., & Chan, Y. E. (2014) · Information & Management · doi:10.1016/j.im.2013.09.001 · Cited by 321
Innovating with enterprise systems and digital platforms: A contingent resource-based theory view
Sedera, D., Lokuge, S., Grover, V., Sarker, S., & Sarker, S. (2016) · Information & Management · doi:10.1016/j.im.2016.01.001 · Cited by 246
Self-citationThe role of formal controls in facilitating information system diffusion
Abubakre, M. A., Ravishankar, M. N., & Coombs, C. R. (2015) · Information & Management · doi:10.1016/j.im.2015.04.005 · Cited by 20
Almuqrin, A., Mutambik, I., Alomran, A., & Zhang, J. Z. (2023) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su15129233 · Cited by 18
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
- Publisher
- 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.