The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Evaluating Information System Effectiveness — Part I: Comparing Evaluation Approaches
Abstract
While the use and costs of Management Information Systems (MIS) have become highly visible, little attention has been paid to assessing and communicating system effectiveness. Evaluation of system effectiveness is difficult due to its multidimensionality, its quantitative and qualitative aspects, and the multiple, and often conflicting, evaluator viewpoints. This article provides an overview of what system effectiveness means and how it should be measured. It is the first of two articles to appear in consecutive issues of the MIS Quarterly. Starting with a definition of system effectiveness, this article examines evaluation of system effectiveness in terms of a conceptual hierarchy of system objectives. The hierarchy is used to discuss problems in, and recommendations for, evaluating system effectiveness, and to compare MIS evaluation approaches. The second article characterizes and compares the evaluator viewpoints on system effectiveness for decision makers in several functional groups involved in MIS implementation — user, MIS, internal audit, and management. The second article recommends several MIS evaluation approaches for incorporating multiple dimensions and multiple evaluator viewpoints into evaluations of information system effectiveness.
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
Decision support systems : an organizational perspective
Keen, P., & Morton, M. S. S. (1978) · Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc. eBooks · Cited by 1,673
Characteristics of application software maintenance
Lientz, B. P., Swanson, E. B., & Tompkins, G. E. (1978) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/359511.359522 · Cited by 431
Performance and the Use of an Information System
Lucas, H. C. (1975) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.21.8.908 · Cited by 337
MisProject Management: Myths, Opinions, and Reality
Powers, R. F., & Dickson, G. W. (1973) · California Management Review · doi:10.2307/41164448 · Cited by 252
Perceptions of the Value of a Management Information System.
Gallagher, C. A. (1974) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.2307/254770 · Cited by 249
The Study of Organizational Effectiveness
Price, J. L. (1972) · The Sociological Quarterly · doi:10.1111/j.1533-8525.1972.tb02100.x · Cited by 242
Strategic Planning for Management Information Systems
Ein-Dor, P., & Segev, E. (1978) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.24.15.1631 · Cited by 128
Measurement of computer user satisfaction
Pearson, S. W., & Bailey, J. E. (1980) · ACM SIGMETRICS Performance Evaluation Review · doi:10.1145/1041872.1041881 · Cited by 100
Cited by
Measuring System Usage: Implications for IS Theory Testing
Straub, D., Limayem, M., & Karahanna-Evaristo, E. (1995) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.41.8.1328 · Cited by 958
Bai, B., Law, R., & Wen, I. (2008) · International Journal of Hospitality Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2007.10.008 · Cited by 749
An empirical study on predicting user acceptance of e-shopping on the Web
Shih, H.-P. (2004) · Information & Management · doi:10.1016/s0378-7206(03)00079-x · Cited by 722
Determinants of success for computer usage in small business
DeLone, W. H. (1988) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/248803 · Cited by 703
Perceived information quality in data exchanges: Effects on risk, trust, and intention to use
Nicolaou, A. I., & McKnight, D. H. (2006) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.1060.0103 · Cited by 682
Metadata
- Authors
- Hamilton, S., & Chervany, N. L.
- Venue
- MIS Quarterly
- Publisher
- MIS Quarterly
- Published
- 1980-09-01
- Volume
- 5
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 55-69
- ISSN
- 0276-7783 (ISSN-L)
- 2162-9730
- OpenAlex
- W1483468980
- Cited by
- 473
- References
- 8
- FWCI
- 2.34
- 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: Evaluating Information System Effectiveness — Part I: Comparing Evaluation Approaches. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/249291
- The paper
- Hamilton, S., & Chervany, N. L. (1981). Evaluating Information System Effectiveness — Part I: Comparing Evaluation Approaches. MIS Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.2307/249291
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.